The Daily Princetonian: March 31, 2023

Staff

Head Photo Editor & Contributing Photographers Jean Shin, Louisa Gheorghita, & Zehao Wu

Guest Contributor Liz Erickson By Guest Contributor Harper Chambers

Protestors flock to Princeton to oppose Israeli judicial reform as controversial lecturer speaks

By Annie Rupertus & Janny Eng Associate News Editor & Staff News Writer

“Needless to say, democracy: in Hebrew, we say ‘democratia,’” history professor Yair Mintzker said in his speech to protestors gathered in front of the Center for Jewish Life (CJL) on Monday, March 27. Over 70 protestors were present, voicing their opposition to a talk at the CJL given by Ronen Shoval, a visiting fellow at the James Madison Program, that evening.

‘Democratia,’ the Hebrew word for democracy, was frequently chanted by the protestors who viewed Shoval’s support of the proposed Israeli judicial reforms as attacks on democracy. Shoval has been tied to groups criticized for their far-right positions and an open letter currently circulating calls on the University to distance itself from Shoval.

Over the past several days in Israel, hospitals, planes, malls, and banks have been shut down as a wave of Israeli citizens took to the streets to protest the judicial reforms put forth by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. These reforms would mean that representatives and appointees of Netanyahu’s right-wing government would have an automatic majority on the committee that chooses judges — essentially placing the choice of judges in the hands of the government.

While around 15 students were present at the protest, the majority of demonstrators were adults from the Princeton area and beyond, including many Israelis. In an email to The Daily Princetonian, Mintzker noted that some came “from as far as New York City.”

Shoval was invited to speak as part of a two-part series on Israeli judicial reform hosted by the CJL. David Halperin, CEO of Israel Policy Forum, spoke on March 23 in opposition to reforms.

According to a student who attended both events, the Halperin event had a much more casual atmosphere and was attended by fewer than 20 people, whereas upwards of 50 came to hear Shoval speak.

After giving a speech at the protest, President of the Alliance for Jewish Progressives Emanuelle Sippy ’25 told the ‘Prince,’ “We are here tonight to say that there’s no democracy possible under apartheid; to say that Ronen Shoval, who’s speaking at the Center for Jewish Life, and the organizations that he is affiliated with, like the Tikvah Fund, like the Kohelet Foundation are deeply problematic and their fascism, their racism, is not in our name. They do not speak for all Jews.”

Shoval is a lecturer in the University’s politics department and the founder of Im Tirtzu, a non-governmental organization that several protestors described as “ultranationalist.” Shoval left Im

Tirtzu in 2013. According to his LinkedIn, he is also Dean of the Tikvah Fund, a Jewish think tank that self-identifies as “politically Zionist, economically free-market oriented, culturally traditional, and theologically open-minded.”

The Tikvah Fund also ran a university center — the Tikvah Project on Jewish Thought at Princeton — in the past. The program ended in 2014.

Protestors gathered outside the CJL at 7:00 p.m., half an hour before Shoval’s presentation began. Many carried Israeli flags, horns, and posters with slogans such as “Democracy for Israelis and Palestinians,” “Save the Supreme Court,” and “Baby girl in my belly wants to grow up in democratic Israel.” The protest was organized by Mintzker and Rica Levy, a resident of the Princeton community.

In an interview with the ‘Prince,’ Levy called Shoval “a racist,” stating, “He’s part of a think tank that’s behind all of the changes that the government wants to make in Israel.” She shared that “the goal of today’s protest, specifically, is to let the person who’s speaking here today understand that many people are opposed to what he is saying.”

When asked about the accusations of fascism and racism in an interview with the ‘Prince,’ Shoval responded, “I hate fascism. I see fascism as dangerous for the world. And I disagree completely with the message of fascism with all my heart.”

“I think that when people are making these kinds of accusations, it is when they don’t want to deal with the other person’s perspective, and it’s much easier to put a label on them,” he continued.

Attitudes regarding the controversial event have continued to evolve on campus. J Street, an organization that, according to their website, “organizes pro-Israel, pro-peace, pro-democracy Americans to promote US policies that embody our deeply held Jewish and democratic values,” initially sponsored the Shoval event and was listed as such on the promotional flyer.

However, according to Joaquin Bierman ’25, president of J Street U Princeton, the group decided to pull their sponsorship of the event “after looking into the right-wing speaker … more closely. We do not support what he stands for in the least.”

The CJL did not condemn the protest, despite sponsoring the event. Before the event began, Executive Director of the CJL Rabbi Gil Steinlauf ’91 addressed protestors outside, stating, “We want you to know that we welcome you here, that we are happy that you are here. We are happy that you are supporting democracy in Israel. CJL supports all of the Jewish people.”

“We know that this is a very painful time for all the Jewish people,” he added. “We know that we are having a speaker

tonight who is difficult for many people.”

In a post-event interview, Steinlauf stated, “we here at the CJL in no way are here to advocate for the views that were presented” by Shoval.

After Steinlauf addressed the crowd, Mintzker then took the front of the crowd, presenting a speech to protestors. During moments of pause, protestors alternated between shouting in Hebrew and booing Shoval.

Mintzker described Shoval’s past actions and support of the Israeli judicial reforms as “proto-fascist.” He drew attention to Shoval’s role as a lecturer at Princeton, calling for students to be able to remove themselves from his first-year seminar, FRS184: Virtues and the Meaning of Life in Different Cultures.

A number of other speakers addressed the crowd, including Sippy, who expressed her disappointment in the CJL’s decision to invite Shoval as a speaker.

“[We’d] like to push the Center for Jewish Life, its staff, and this entire university to recognize that if they claim to care about Jewish students, they actually cannot continue to support right-wing fascist propaganda,” she said.

Inside the CJL, Jewish Agency Israel Fellow Eitan Teiger moderated the talk.

“The purpose of this series is to educate our students and community and to engage in meaningful conversations and productive debate,” Teiger stated at the beginning of the event.

Once the talk had ended, Teiger provided commentary regarding the CJL’s decision to host Shoval.

“It’s important for me and for us at the CJL to have the ability to have these hard conversations,” he stated. “Although we had some difficulties here, we can tolerate it, including the fact that there was a demonstration outside. I think this is an example for dialogue or conversation when it’s hard.”

In an interview after the talk, Steinlauf elaborated on how Shoval had been chosen to speak.

“Our Israel fellow [Teiger] invited these two speakers knowing that they would represent very sharp contrasts,” he said. According to Steinlauf, they were invited with the approval of a special committee, composed of Princeton faculty, members of the CJL Board of Directors, and students, who “represent a broad array of political perspectives on Israel.”

“The understanding was, of course, that this would be deeply controversial.”

Shoval’s presentation at the CJL comes after campus controversy over the English department’s Edward W. Said ’57 Memorial Lecture with Palestinian writer Mohammed El-Kurd, who has been accused of antisemitism. A letter signed by members of the Princeton community, delivered to the English department, called on them to

denounce the speaker. Steinlauf stressed that the CJL’s event was different in nature to that of the El-Kurd lecture.

“I think that the reason why we were deeply concerned about Mohammed El-Kurd speaking, is because he engaged in speech that was directly inciting, that invoked classic antisemitic tropes,” Steinlauf said in an interview with the ‘Prince.’

“This is a completely different kind of situation in that this is a deep divide within the Jewish community. It’s a divide between two vehemently opposed views of what the Jewish state can be or ought to be, and very, very different views of what constitutes liberalism and what is illiberal in the Jewish state.”

Not all students agree.

“It is one thing to invite Shoval on the grounds of the University’s free speech policies, and it is another for the Center for Jewish Life to pretend that this invitation falls in line with their own policies, in which they claim that the organization will not ‘promote racism or hatred of any kind,’”

Sippy wrote in an email to the ‘Prince.’ “Shoval promotes racism and hatred; the only question is whether the CJL is blind to this fact or blatantly disregards its own policies — in favor of the right.”

Shoval’s address and the protest were also not entirely removed from the broader debate around Israel and Palestine.

During the Q&A portion of the event, one student attendee asked Shoval to address Israel’s “military occupation” of Palestine and the nonvoting status of most Palestinians in Israel’s elections, referencing Israeli officials’ denial of the existence of a Palestinian people and the burning of Palestinian villages.

Shoval opposed the premise of the question, stating that though Palestinians cannot vote in Israeli elections, they have their own government with the potential for democratic elections.

Some protestors outside also held signs in support of Palestine.

Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza are ineligible to vote in Israeli elections, while those living in East Jerusalem are only eligible if they have obtained an Israeli citizenship — a move that would forfeit their right to vote in Palestinian elections. The Palestinian Authority (PA), the legal governing body in the West Bank and Gaza, held its first municipal elections since 2006 in 2021, though PA president Mahmoud Abbas’s term ended in 2009 and he has not been formally re-elected since.

Before and during Shoval’s address, protestors outside continued to chant in Hebrew, “He’s a fascist,” “Shame,” and “Democracy.”

At times, they sang the Is -

raeli national anthem and used horns and whistles to emphasize their point.

About ten minutes into the talk, a microphone was brought into the CJL for Shoval so he could be heard over the protestors. Free Expression Coordinators from the Office of the Dean of Undergraduate Students (ODUS) came outside to speak with Professor Mintzker multiple times regarding the noise being made, as the protestors could be heard from inside the CJL. In response to the “amplified noise” complaint, protestors lessened their use of the whistles and horns but continued to chant and shout.

According to the ODUS website, “Activities that take place in the vicinity of University residences, classrooms, the library, the chapel, and similar facilities must be conducted in such a way as to respect the necessity for maintaining a reasonable degree of quiet in such areas.”

University Spokesperson Michael Hotchkiss wrote to the ‘Prince,’ “At Monday’s protest outside CJL, asking the protestors to stop using battery-powered sound devices was sufficient to allow the event inside to continue without disruption while protestors continued to be able to express their views outside.”

Inside, Shoval continued his talk, with various interruptions from audience members attempting to dispute his claims. As Shoval spoke, the flag of Israel repeatedly fell off the wall, much to the audience’s amusement.

At one point, Shoval compared the judicial reform protests in Israel to the Jan. 6, 2021 Capitol riot in the United States.

Referring to the riot, Shoval said, “What you see in Israel is exactly the same.” He said that Israeli protestors are part of a political minority “trying to overrule the decision of the majority.” In response, an audience member interrupted, but Teiger intervened, stating that there would be time for questions at the end.

Later, during the Q&A period, one student pushed back against Shoval’s comparison, stating that it was “Not accurate at all.” The student’s criticism was met with applause from the audience, but Shoval doubled down, stating, “As much as it’s uncomfortable to see it, this is exactly a mirror.”

In a later interview with the ‘Prince,’ Shoval characterized both situations as one where “the side [who] is losing the election doesn’t accept the outcome of the election and uses violence in order to promote their ideas.”

In an interview following the event, CJL Student President Julie Levey ’24 stated, “I’m very proud of my peers at the CJL for showing up not just tonight, but also at the first part of this two-part event and asking critical, analytical, well-articulated, and deeply thought-out questions.”

Throughout the rest of Shoval’s speech, several students and community members tried to interrupt and dispute his claims, and on multiple occasions, audience members and Shoval raised their voices, sometimes in Hebrew. Those gathered inside the CJL at times disagreed, and additional back-and-forths broke out between those opposed to Shoval’s speech and those in support.

Janny Eng is a staff News writer for the ‘Prince.’

Annie Rupertus is an associate News editor for the ‘Prince.’

LOUISA GHEORGHITA / THE DAILY PRINCETONIAN

Campus Accessibility

Michael Barnes looks back on his first year

By Tess Weinreich Associate News Editor

As the end of the spring semester nears, Director of Campus Accessibility Michael Barnes’ first year of working at Princeton is coming to a conclusion — as is the first year of the position’s existence, which was introduced by the University this fall. Barnes’ role is intended to serve as the “leading authority on physical accessibility on campus,” according to a listing posted to DiverseJobs in September 2022. Barnes identifies as a person with a non-physical disability.

“As a student with a disability, I relied heavily on my university's disability support office and credit this experience with my career trajectory,” he wrote in a message to The Daily Princetonian.

His hiring comes at a time of extensive disruption to physical accessibility on campus, with 11 major ongoing construction projects termed “one of the most extensive building programs in [University] history.”

These projects have been criticized by members of the University community for reducing campus accessibility and impairing physical access. Detours are often unideal for those with mobility-related disabilities, due to narrow walkways, steep inclines, or stairs.

The Director of Campus Disability’s responsibilities include supporting the work of previously established positions and offices, such as the University’s ADA/Section 504 Coordinator, the Office of Disability Services (ODS), and Facilities, as well as identifying new initiatives to enhance access on campus.

ADA refers to The Americans with Disabilities Act, a law that prohibits discrimination against individuals with disabilities in many areas of public life. Section 504 is a portion of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 that prohibits discrimination on the basis of disability in programs that receive federal financial assistance from the U.S. Department of Education.

When asked about what projects he has taken on so far, Barnes reported that he has “had many conversations,” but noted that “there are more perspectives needed.”

“From the beginning, we saw this role as being one that, while based in Facilities, has substantial ties to the Vice Provost for Space Programming and Planning, Institutional Equity and Diversity, and the Office of Disability Services, among others,” he wrote. “It was important to establish these relationships from the beginning.”

Liz Erickson, the Director for Disability Services and the AccessAbility Center, confirmed that she has collaborated “frequently” with Barnes in the past few months. She noted that his presence has offset work relating to “physical access challenges” that was previously under ODS purview.

“[H]aving the authority to lead efforts for change will be instrumental in increasing the pace at which we maintain and make improvements to physical access,” Erickson

added. According to University Spokesperson Michael Hotchkiss, “[Barnes’] focus in his first four months has been on learning about the campus, connecting with members of the Princeton community, and meeting with stakeholders on specific accessibility concerns.”

Erickson said that the Director of Campus Accessibility position is “novel in the field of higher education” and “will enable Princeton to be on the leading edge of advancement of physical access on our campus.”

All members of the Ivy League offer support for accessibility at the administrative level, generally through directors of institutional equity, student disability services, or ADA/504 coordinators. Princeton is the first to have a full-time staff member dedicated to issues of physical access.

According to Hotchkiss, a team of campus stakeholders conducted a nationwide search to fill the new position, created in an effort to fulfill an institutional commitment to “creating a wholly accessible and welcoming campus for all.”

“Fulfilling this vision required a leader who would be responsible for assessing and addressing the accessibility needs of our facilities, grounds, paths and parking.”

In a statement sent to the ‘Prince,’ Barnes said that he “knew coming in that a lot of exceptional work around accessibility was already happening,” raising examples of progress prior to his arrival, such as the installation of an elevator in Nassau Hall and the design of Yeh College and New College West. He clarified, however, that the work is not done.

“There are accessibility challenges across campus,” Barnes wrote. “By acknowledging the challenges and keeping them in front of mind, Princeton will become a more accessible place every semester.”

Prior to signing on at Princeton, Barnes was a faculty member in Stockton University’s program in Disability Studies. He has additionally served as director of several disability resource centers, at various colleges and universities throughout his career. He graduated from Cabrini University with a Bachelor of Arts in Education and Bachelor of Science in Special Education in 2006 and received a Master of Science in Education Degree from the University of Pennsylvania in 2011.

Tess Weinreich is an associate News editor for the ‘Prince.’

Dashram Pai

Remembering the ‘mother of the disability rights movement’: Judy Heumann’s legacy at Princeton and beyond

By Sophie Glaser Staff News Writer

“There was a deep poise about her,” Rabbi Gil Steinlauf ’91 said of Judy Heumann. “She had a deep sense of mission and purpose, grounded in her own experience for justice.”

Judith “Judy” Heumann, a lifelong disability rights advocate, passed away on March 4, 2023, in Washington, D.C. Her activism, organizing, and policy leadership spanned decades, with career highlights including her contribution to the passage of Section 504, the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), and the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). As the country and the larger world process Heumann’s passing and celebrate her memory, The Daily Princetonian reached out to Princeton community members with a personal connection to Heumann.

Heumann, considered by many to be “‘the mother’ of the disability rights movement,” was born in Philadelphia in 1947. She was raised in Brooklyn and contracted polio in 1949 and had used a wheelchair since. Heumann rose to prominence as an activist in the 1970s for her advocacy for Section 504.

Naomi Hess ’22 recalled meeting Heumann in the summer of 2020 when she participated in an internship program with the American Association of People with Disabilities (AAPD). Heumann spoke with Hess and her co-workers via Zoom — an experience and memory that followed Hess back to campus in the fall.

Two years prior, Hess had brought the idea of celebrating Jewish Disability Awareness and Inclusion Month to Rabbi Ira Dounn, suggesting that she could plan a specialized Shabbat at the Center for Jewish Life (CJL). For the event’s third year, Hess had the idea to invite Heumann.

“I was able to use my contacts from [the AAPD] to get in touch with her,” Hess recalled, “and personally asked her if she would be interested in doing [a Jewish Disability Awareness and Inclusion month] Shabbat.”

Hess served as an associate News editor at the ‘Prince’ and is currently a Young Alumni Trustee.

After months of planning on the part of Hess and her coorganizer Katie Heinzer ’22, in early March 2021, the CJL hosted Heumann virtually in partnership with Hillel@

Home, Hillel International’s People with Disabilities Employee Resource Group, the Office of the Dean of Undergraduate Students, Undergraduate Student Government Projects Board, and the AccessAbility Center. Over 150 individuals from the University community and beyond attended the event. Heumann spoke on topics of intersectionality, Jewish community, and media representation of individuals with disabilities.

Heinzer previously served as a podcast editor for the ‘Prince.’

According to Hess, who co-moderated the event with Heinzer, the event “focused on disability inclusion within and outside of Jewish spaces.”

“She did talk about her attitude towards disability … Whenever she came up to barriers, she would just forcibly remove [them], and then use [them] to teach others to show the fact that disability is not a bad word,” Heinzer said about the event.

Dounn, a Senior Jewish Educator at the CJL, commented on the impact of the event.

“Judy was her extraordinary, sharp, witty self,” he said.

“[She was someone] who could compassionately speak truth to power, who could tell someone with love that they were doing something terribly wrong, and that we should change and accommodate people who weren’t being accommodated and include people who were being excluded,” Dounn continued.

Dounn attended Heumann’s memorial service, which took place in March both in-person and over Zoom.

“The thing about Judy is that she made everyone into family,” Dounn elaborated.

“What was so moving about the funeral was everybody considered themselves a sibling of Judy’s or family. Here’s this person who’s doing this advocacy work trying to get society to change in a meaningful way. But she’s doing it through love, she’s doing [it] through community, and connection and human interaction in the most pure and beautiful way,” Dounn said.

Heinzer also attended Heumann’s memorial service.

“I was having a lot of difficulty in the couple of days before, understanding that she wasn’t here anymore, because she has just such a gregarious personality … every single person in that room had those stories of Judy,” Heinzer said.

“Everybody [at the service] carried that intimate piece of her in our lives and out to the

rest of the world. She had such an impact on everyone who she spoke with, even once, that her memory is not lost on anyone.”

Rabbi Gil Steinlauf ’91, who currently serves as the CJL Executive Director and Jewish Chaplain at Princeton University, shared his own memories of Heumann. Steinlauf led Adas Israel Congregation in Washington, D.C. from 2008–2018, where Heumann was a member.

“She was a force. She was unstoppable,” Steinlauf said. “She had an exquisite sense of what is right and what is just, and would not depart from her commitment to, what we call in Judaism, tzedek, which means justice.”

Steinlauf added, “I use that term because she was deeply grounded in her Jewish tradition as well and drew a lot of strength and a lot of courage from the Judaism that she cherished in her life.”

Steinlauf also attested to his experience with Heumann’s devotion to cross movement solidarity — a core tenet of disability justice.

“[When I first came out,] she was one of the first people who reached out to me, one of the first people I talked to,” he said. “Every time I shared my experiences or my struggles, she just nodded and you could tell that there was something about her that fundamentally understood the intersection between the disability community and the struggle of LGBTQ people.”

Some of Heumann’s early activism involved protesting President Nixon’s original veto of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, which prohibits federal agencies from discrimination on the basis of disability.

The act was eventually passed, but Section 504 of the Act, which specifically protected the rights of disabled people to access federally funded spaces such as libraries and schools through accommodations, did not take effect for several years.

Heumann and a group of over 100 protestors arrived at the San Francisco Health, Education, and Welfare office in April of 1977. After learning that the regional director had no idea what Section 504 was, they staged a sit-in that would become one of the longest occupations of a U.S. federal building. The sit-in was a collaborative effort between the disability activists and their allies, including members of the Black Panther Party who brought the protestors food during the occupation.

Following the 1977 sit-in, Heumann testified before members of Congress. One of the most prominent moments from her testimony involved Heumann directly addressing Eugene Eidenberg, who represented the Health, Education, and Welfare office at the hearing.

“We will no longer allow the government to oppress disabled individuals. We want the law enforced. We want no more segregation. We will accept no more discussion of segregation,” Heumann began. Looking at Eidenberg, she continued, “and I would appreciate it if you would stop shaking your head in agreement when I don’t think you understand what we are talking about.” Later in her life, Heumann advised the Berkeley Center for Independent Living, worked with the Clinton administration’s Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services, and served during the Obama administration as special assistant to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

Heumann’s advocacy contributed to the passage of the Americans with Disabilities Act by former U.S. President George H. W. Bush in 1990.

During Hess’ time as a student at Princeton, she had the opportunity to profile Heumann for a journalism class. Hess recalled Heumann’s response to a question she asked relating to retirement.

“I asked her what she did now that she was retired. She corrected me immediately,”

Hess recalled. “She jumped right in and said that she retired from the federal government, but she was not retired by any means. She always knew that there was more to be done. But at the same time, she cared so deeply about the people around her.”

Hess also recalled her last meeting with Heumann in January 2023.

“I went over to her apartment for dinner. Something that really stood out to me is that she was just so loving. As we parted ways that night, I didn’t know that it would be the last time, but we hugged each other. And when two people in wheelchairs hug it's difficult, and powerful,” Hess said. “I don't think I took it for granted that I have this really powerful disabled woman to look up to, who cared about me.” Heumann gained additional prominence in 2020 with the publication of her memoir, “Being Heumann:

An Unrepentant Memoir of a Disability Rights Activist,” and with the release of the documentary film “Crip Camp: A Disability Revolution.” The film detailed the path of campers and counselors at Camp Jened, a summer camp for disabled youth, as they explored their identities and formed a community that led many of them to impactful disability activism.

“I’m glad that she was starting to get more recognition in the past couple of years,” Hess said. “She didn’t do all this for the recognition. But after such an amazing life of advocacy … just for her to know personally that people are seeing her, truly seeing her for all her work, I’m sure that really meant a lot,” Hess said.

On the theme of family and recognition, Dounn said, “[Heumann] was not in it for glory, or for ego. She was in it because it was the all in the family. It was relationships. It was ‘How could you let this happen to your sister, your brother, your child, your father, your mother, how could you let this happen to your family? Of course I’m going to fight for my family.’ Simple as that. It’s just so beautiful.”

Hess also noted the impact of her personal relationship with Heumann. “It’s really not often that you get to meet one of your heroes, let alone befriend them. I just feel so, so lucky to have known Judy these past couple years. The world is a better place because of her … seeing the outpouring of love for her after her passing from every corner of the world was really moving for me,” Hess said. “I just feel so fortunate to have gotten to know her and to be able to learn from her. She never hesitated to help others.”

Heinzer, who also participates in disability-related advocacy, echoed a similar sentiment: “It’s because of Judy that I see the value of my work. She wasn't just an untouchable figure … she was a wonderful person every day and talking to her just felt like the most comfortable, easy thing.”

Several community members noted that Heumann specifically sought to inspire the next generation of activists.

Steinlauf said, “She fundamentally understood the importance of inspiring the younger generation … she understood that standing up for disability rights is actually standing up for the rights of all marginalized peoples in this world. She wanted people to understand that there’s a fellowship and a kinship between all peoples who are struggling for a more just society and a more just world.”

“She lived truly to make the world a better and holier place, and the world is a more sacred place because she lived, and it’s an honor for me personally to have known her, but I think it’s a blessing to all of us that she was in this world,” Steinlauf said.

Dounn said, “there’s a whole generation of people now who have a different fight to fight. She’s bent the arc of history towards justice in such a way that we’re now on a different part of that arc.”

“She paved the way for future disabled leaders to really make an impact. Because of some of the laws that Judy helped to get passed, I had access to an amazing public education that really propelled me to Princeton,” Hess said. “Judy spent so much of her life back when she was a teacher herself, and then once she was in leadership in the Department of Education, really making sure that would be possible for people like me.”

Sophie Glaser is a staff News writer and assistant Features editor for the ‘Prince.’

Naomi Hess with Judy Heumann in Washington, D.C.

U. opts for familiar face in announcing Terri Sewell ’86 as 2023 Class Day Speaker

By Sandeep Mangat Head

Editor

In a video highlighting the trailblazing nature of her time at Princeton, the Class of 2023 Class Day chairs announced that U.S. Rep. Terri Sewell ’86, a University trustee, would be the 2023 Class Day speaker.

Sewell represents Alabama’s 7th congressional district. Her election in 2010 made her the first Black woman to serve in the state’s congressional delegation.

Sewell is now the second-most senior Democrat in the House of Representatives with a Princeton undergraduate degree — a group of five this Congress. In recent years, Sewell has played a more prominent role at the

University, joining the Board of Trustees as an elected alumni representative in 2019.

Sewell has spoken at the University on multiple occasions, speaking on a panel of alumni in elected office during Wintersession 2021 and on Feb. 26 answering questions at an event hosted by Whig-Clio and the College Democrats. Sewell is one of few nationally elected officials currently serving to speak on campus since the pandemic, joining Rep. Bonnie Watson Coleman in April 2022 and Rep. Andy Kim in Nov. 2021. This semester, Rep. Derek Kilmer is teaching a Policy Task Force in the School of Public and International Affairs.

In 2020, Sewell also became the first Black woman to receive Whig-

Clio’s James Madison Award for Distinguished Public Service.

When analyzing Class Day speakers from 2001 to 2022, politicians are less common as class day speakers than major artists or entertainers. On March 21, Harvard announced that Tom Hanks would be the Class of 2023 Commencement speaker.

As a student at Princeton, she concentrated in the School of Public and International Affairs and received a certificate in African American Studies. She went on to receive a master’s degree in politics from St. Hilda’s College at Oxford University and then a law degree from Harvard. Before being elected to Congress, she was a partner in the Birmingham law office of Maynard Cooper & Gale, special-

izing in public finance law.

In Congress, Sewell sits on the House Ways and Means Committee, which is the chief tax-writing committee of the House, and the Steering and Policy Committee, which selects committee members from the House Democratic Caucus. She is currently serving her seventh term.

In an email to The Daily Princetonian, Class Day co-chair Ryan Champeau ’23 described Sewell as someone “we should all look up to.”

“From D.C. to Princeton, she works hard to change the world for the better while maintaining the Princeton spirit that we all know and love,” she wrote.

Co-chairs Zyan Wynn ’23 and Douglas Robins ’23 echoed this senti-

ment.

“Congresswoman Sewell represents everything that we should aspire to as graduating seniors,” Wynn wrote, with Robins adding that “Congresswoman Sewell has centered uplifting other people at the core of her work while still being true to herself.”

“As our class prepares to walk through FitzRandolph Gates and scatter across the world to pursue some of our passions, there is no better person than Congresswoman Sewell, who sat in our very seats, to instill parting advice,” Robins said.

Sewell will speak on Class Day, Monday, May 29.

Sandeep Mangat serves as head News editor for the ‘Prince.’

Does fossil fuel funding impact research? Researchers say it ’s the other way around

By Julian Hartman-Sigall Assistant News Editor

After the University announced in September 2022 that it would be divesting its endowment from fossil fuel stocks and dissociating from 90 fossil fuel companies, one of the University’s two major research partnerships with fossil fuel companies came to an end. Between 2010 and 2020, Princeton received over 36 million dollars from fossil fuel companies, almost all of which was from ExxonMobil or British Petroleum (BP). Princeton cut ties with ExxonMobil, yet the partnership with BP continues.

Since 2000, BP has funded Princeton’s Carbon Mitigation Initiative (CMI) since 2000 whose mission is “to lead the way to a compelling and sustainable solution to the carbon and climate change problem.”

While activists have criticized the research relationship, saying that it has the potential for biased results, researchers at CMI defend the ties, saying that the support helps find climate solutions and gives researchers opportunities to influence their company sponsors.

According to a report from the University’s Faculty Panel on Fossil Fuel Dissociation, dissociation is only necessary “when the actions of that company are found to being strong contradiction with Princeton University’s core values,” which applied to companies engaged in active disinformation campaigns and those that profit off of tar sands, coal, and other high-emitting forms of energy production.

The lack of a complete dissociation from all fossil fuel companies and the University’s continuing relationship with BP has drawn the ire of campus activists. “The fact that [CMI] is solely funded by BP raises suspicions when the Institute’s work allows the company to direct the climate conversation towards energy changes that benefit it,” wrote Associate Opinion Editor Eleanor Clemans-Cope ’26 and Contributing Columnist Alex Norbrook ’26 in February.

Princeton’s Office of Research & Project Administration approves all research-funding relationships on campus, requires that contracts with sponsors allow for academic freedom, ensuring that research findings are not influenced by the source of their funding. Recipients of BP’s funding defended the partnership as critical to climate research priorities.

“We need everybody to solve the climate problem. We are not going to succeed if we polarize the conversation,” Professor Emeritus of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering Robert Socolow, who co-founded the CMI said in an interview with the ‘Prince.’ “We need a lot of people coming from many different starting places and that includes industry.” Co-founder and current director of the CMI Stephen Pacala echoed Socolow’s sentiment.

“Dissociation always struck me as virtue signaling. That was, in my view, intellectually lazy virtue signaling, because those who want to do it have every intention of continuing to use the product,” Pacala said.

Climate activists on campus, however, disagree.

“Princeton should not be participating with the fossil fuel industry because it is the industry that is doing the most damage to your future. Why is Princeton, an institution that is dedicated to essentially educating people for the future, partnering with the one industry that is still committed to ruining your future?” asked Lynne Archibald ’87 in an interview with the ‘Prince’. Archibald is

a member of Divest Princeton who has written a number of articles advocating for divestment and dissociation.

Researchers at the CMI also defended the University’s previous relationship with ExxonMobil. Before dissociation, ExxonMobil was a member of an industrial affiliates program run by the Andlinger Center that sponsored research at Princeton. Additionally, ExxonMobil had a senior scientific advisor affiliated with the Andlinger Center that used to identify Princeton scholars for ExxonMobil to fund.

In an interview with the ‘Prince,’ Senior Research Engineer for the Andlinger Center Eric Larson said, “Having the relationship with Exxon was an opportunity to influence them in a way that we won't be able to do now. Regardless of the funding, [the influence] is probably more important and we've lost that.”

Socolow, who called the decision to disassociate “misguided,” said, “We lost [Exxon’s] view and their input of where they're coming from, which I think you need in order to understand the problem.”

Multiple Princeton climate researchers who spoke to the ‘Prince’ agreed that BP is more environmentally responsible than ExxonMobil, explaining BP has more aggressive and respected emissions targets than ExxonMobil.

At the same time, those researchers said they found the distinction in dissociation drawn by the University between ExxonMobil and BP to be questionable. Socolow said, “Among the major oil companies to start making distinctions, I don't think it's so simple…I don't think there is a big enough difference to make the distinction we did, I think it was a stretch.”

Potential influence on BP

A number of researchers who spoke with the ‘Prince’ noted that the relationship between researchers and BP is far different from that with ExxonMobil, noting how the relationship with ExxonMobil was a transactional exchange of funding for research. With BP, on the other hand, the relationship is closer: professors at Princeton are in periodic contact with upper management at BP, sharing their research findings and occasionally advising BP on business decisions, according to multiple researchers involved in the relationship who spoke to the ‘Prince.’

Researchers at CMI believe that they have had a strong influence on BP. Senior Research Scientist Chris Greig told the ‘Prince’ a story about Robert Socolow at a meeting with BP executives.

“[Executives at BP] said, you know, so we're presenting our targets on methane reductions from our operations. They were quite proud of it. But Rob Socolow stood up and said, ‘Hang on a minute. That's pathetic. That's just not not bold enough. It's not, it's not quick enough. It's not ambitious enough. You guys need to do better than that,’” Greig recounted.

Greig continued, “We had a bit of a debate about that then they got their board together, and reported back to us that they had lifted the level of ambition and they put it out in the press.”

CMI researchers also said that Princeton’s relationship with BP is at least partially responsible for increasing the level of ambition of BP’s methane program and getting BP to commit to a net-zero goal.

A document released by the House Oversight Committee as part of a Congressional Inquiry into fossil fuel companies revealed that CMI advised BP to “understand the potential for [carbon capture and storage] CCS to enable the full use of fossil fuels across the energy transition and beyond.”

That same document revealed that

CMI advised BP on a campaign strategy.

Professors associated with CMI insisted that BP had no say over what the CMI should study or what they found. Pacala said, “BP has no say over what we study. They give us the money without consultation about what it is we're going to say. We just tell them what we found out.”

Later, he continued, “Our goals have from the very beginning to end the carbon and climate problem. That's everything we do is focused on stopping the carbon and climate problem. I want to end global warming. And I want to end it for you, I want to end it for me, I want to end it for my kids, and I want to end it for my grandkids.”

“The only pushback we've ever gotten for that [fossil fuel funding] is in Princeton University publications,” he added.

Pacala said, “When somebody asks me, are your results tainted by the fossil money, I often point to that result [of the net-zero America study]. If so, then that industry must cherish its own demise.”

The Net-Zero America study is the flagship product of the CMI. The report goes into great detail to lay out five distinct possible pathways that the United States could take to decarbonize its entire economy with already-existing technologies. It is difficult to understate the study, which was the first of its kind: the report was extensively covered in the news and, according to both its critics

and supporters, was highly influential in the construction of the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022.

The same way that CMI’s supporters cite the Net-Zero America study, which dictates that no more fossil fuel production occurs after 2050, as proof of its independence from BP, so do its critics. Archibald pointed out that “four out of the five pathways [in the report] rely on fossil fuels.” She also blamed the study for treating carbon capture and storage as “a viable strategy for transition away from fossil fuels” even though, according to Archibald, “it’s not a viable technology.”

“CMI was created by BP, it’s the sole funder, and one of their main recommendations to BP was to focus on carbon capture and storage as a way to prolong their industry life,” Claire Kaufman GS, a Divest Princeton activist, said. “Yeah, it does reduce carbon emissions, but not to the extent we need to and it's a big diversion of funds that could be used better elsewhere [researching renewable energy sources].”

Greig, whose research is primarily concerned with negative emissions technologies, defended carbon capture and storage as critical to a smooth transition away from fossil fuels.

Recently, fossil fuel companies saw their profits surge after gas prices rose during the Russia-Ukraine war. In the midst of these increased profits, BP,

like multiple other fossil fuel companies, scaled back its climate goals and increased its investments in oil and gas production.

Many have accused fossil fuel companies of greenwashing, a term used to describe the exaggeration of climate promises and credentials for the purposes of positive public relations. Archibald, like many other activists, said that BP’s relationship with Princeton is, in part, a public relations endeavor intended to distract from their lack of climate progress and continued profit off of climate change.

Some CMI researchers have been skeptical of fossil fuel sponsors as multiple have told the ‘Prince’ that they have been personally divested from these companies for years, but they still appreciate the opportunity to influence the company.

“Consider their ambitions and their stated objectives with some level of skepticism. You know, they speak out of two sides of their mouths, when they’ll say we want to be net zero by 2050, but then their capital allocation doesn't reflect that,” Greig said. “And I tell them that. I can do that. I have tenure. I don't need their funding to be employed.”

Julian Hartman-Sigall is an assistant News editor for the ‘Prince.’

This Week in Photos

By Jean Shin, Louisa Gheorghita & Zehao Wu Head

& Contributing

Who governs Princeton? The Board of Trustees, examined

By Ryan Konarska & Lia Opperman Assistant Data Editor & Investigations Editor

Behind the doors of Nassau Hall, a group of 39 individuals make the decisions that determine Princeton’s future. As the chief governing body of the University, the Board of Trustees passes the University’s budget, supervises the management of the endowment, sets changes in tuition and fees, determines what changes to teaching methods should be made, and crafts the admission policy that whittles Princeton’s more than 30,000 applicants to the lucky 1,500 incoming first-years.

Decisions of the Board of Trustees have had major impacts in recent years. Last September, the Trustees voted to dissociate from 90 fossil fuels companies and in June 2020, the Board decided to rename the previous Woodrow Wilson School, now the School of Public and International Affairs, and Wilson College, now First College.

Despite their importance, the composition of the Board of Trustees is not widely known. The Daily Princetonian examined Trustees’ backgrounds, professions, and relationships to Princeton.

None of the members of the Board responded to a request for comment from the ‘Prince.’

Election to the Board

Constitutionally, the Board of Trustees is composed of no fewer than 23 and no more than 40 members. Currently, 39 trustees sit on the board. All members of the board except Gov. Phil Murphy, an ex officio member, are alumni of the University.

There are four types of elected trustees: Charter,

Term, Alumni, and Young Alumni Trustees. Charter Trustees are elected by existing members of the board for six-year terms with the opportunity to serve an additional two-year term; until July 2020, Charter Trustees were elected to eight-year terms. Term trustees are chosen by the board for a term of four years.

Nine Alumni Trustees are elected by the full alumni of the University for a term of four years, with new alumni trustees elected every year.

There are also four Young Alumni Trustees: every year, the current junior and senior classes, as well as the two most recently graduated classes, elect a member of the senior class to serve as a Young Alumni Trustee for four years. Most recently, the Classes of 2020, 2021, 2022, and 2023 elected Naomi Hess ’22 as Young Alumni Trustee.

Additionally, the President of Princeton University and the Governor of New Jersey are included on the board as ex officio members. Currently, these roles are filled by University President Christopher L. Eisgruber ’83 and Phil Murphy.

Trustees can serve multiple terms on the board, including through different processes, provided there is at least a one year gap between terms.

Despite the difference in selection processes, Section 1.1 (g) of the University bylaws states that “Trustees ex officio, Charter Trustees, Term Trustees, and Alumni Trustees shall have the same duties, rights, and powers.”

Trustee backgrounds

The Board of Trustees contains alumni from a wide array of backgrounds, disciplines, and lines of work. Many are accomplished in their fields, with CEOs, members of Congress, and professors among the ranks

of trustees. 15 of the 39 trustees have or currently work in financial fields, such as capital management, investing, or consulting. Seven trustees work in academia, while five work for nonprofits or other advocacy fields. Just five trustees work in STEMrelated fields.

Louise Sams ’79 has the longest tenure on the board, having served almost uninterruptedly since 2004. Many trustees serve four years as Alumni or Term Trustees before leaving the board for a year and then being named Charter Trustees.

The median year of trustees graduating from Princeton is 1988. Graduation years range from Paul Maeder in 1975 to young alumni trustee Naomi Hess who graduated in 2022. No members of the board of trustees graduated between 1999 and 2016.

Places of residence

35 of the 39 trustees live in the United States, according to the Board of Trustees website. Five trustees call New York home, all of whom live in New York City. Four trustees live in California, all in the Bay Area, and four live in New Jersey. 32 states have no trustees within their borders. Trustees tend to live in the coastal regions of the United States, with just five trustees coming from landlocked states.

Their time at Princeton

At Princeton, most trustees studied a discipline in the humanities or social sciences. The most common field of study was history, with nine trustees having majored in this discipline, while seven trustees studied in the School of Public and International Affairs and four in mechanical and aerospace engineering. In total, 13 out of the 39 trustees studied STEM disciplines.

32 of the 39 trustees gradu-

ated from Princeton as undergraduates. Of these 32, 27 received Bachelor of Arts degrees, while just five received a Bachelor of Science in Engineering. Of the six trustees who attended Princeton for graduate study, five received Doctor of Philosophy degrees, while one obtained a Master of Public Affairs degree.

The ‘Prince’ used the University Library’s Yearbook archive to determine which eating club, if any, University trustees who attended Princeton as undergraduates were members of. Cap and Gown Club has the most trustee alumni, with seven former members. Following Cap is the University Cottage Club and Cannon with four trustees each, though one of these was a member of Dial Lodge and two were in Elm Club, both of which are predecessors to today’s Cannon Dial Elm Club.

Tower Club had three trustees. Tiger Inn, Quadrangle, and Campus Clubs each counted two trustees as part of their alumni, while Charter, Colonial, Ivy, and Terrace each had one trustee. No trustees were alumni of Cloister Inn.

Politics

Many trustees are active in the political realm, through public service or donating to political causes. Through the Federal Election Commission’s donor lookup tool, we examined the political donations of each of the University trustees. The ‘Prince’ identified 3,135 unique monetary donations made by members of the Board of Trustees dating back to 1989. In total, the current Board has collectively donated $7,858,125 to political causes over the last 33 years.

Approximately 78 percent of political donations made by the current trustees have been to candidates or causes associated with the Democratic Party. This balance has shifted towards Democrats over time; for example, in 2010, nearly 58 percent of the current trustees’ donations were to Republican candidates or associated groups, a number which declined to just six percent in 2022. The total sum of donations has also increased over time — the current trustees donated just $344,092 to political causes in 2012, a presidential election year, but they donated nearly $1 million in 2016 and over $1.5 million in 2020.

The trustee that has donated the most to political causes by far is Blair Effron ’84, who has donated $2,942,046.91 since 1992. Since 2005, Effron has donated entirely to Democratic-associated or nonpartisan causes. Effron’s donations represent almost 38 percent of all trustee donations.

Following Effron in political donations are Bradford Smith and Peter Briger, who have donated $1.53 million and $1.23 million, respectively. Almost all trustees have donated mostly to Democratic candidates and causes except for Yeh and Anthony Yoseloff ’96, who directed 80 and 58 percent of their donations to Republican beneficiaries, respectively.

Impact on campus

The trustees’ donations to the University can be seen in the many buildings and organizations named after them. Yeh is the namesake of Yeh College and Yoseloff provided the donation to construct Yoseloff Hall in Butler College. Maeder Hall, which houses the primary lecture hall of the Andlinger Center for Energy and the Environment, was made possible by a gift from Maeder.

The M.S. Chadha Center

for Global India is named after Sumir Chadha ’93. Effron provided the funds for the Effron Center for the Study of America, which expanded the University’s American Studies program. While the ‘Prince’ could not verify whether the Effron Music Building was named after Effron himself, it bears his last name.

How wealthy are Princeton trustees on the whole? Looking at the cumulative net worths of the Board, the wealth seems to be relatively concentrated in a few trustees. About 75 percent of trustees have a net worth below $10 million. Trustees’ net worth was found through public resources online.

Princeton class reunion books often feature profiles of alumni with their children’s names. The ‘Prince’ was able to identify 26 children of 10 trustees, 23 of which were old enough to have applied and attended college. Of these 23, 14 attended Princeton, though only six were admitted during their parent’s time on the Board of Trustees.

Comparison to other schools

Compared to the rest of the Ivy League, Princeton has an average number of trustees. Yale University has the fewest number of trustees, at 19, and Cornell University has the most trustees, at 64.

Yale University’s Board of Trustees consists of the University President, ten “successor trustees” selected by the existing Board of Trustees to serve up to two six-year terms, six alumni trustees elected by alumni of the University, and one senior trustee chosen by the President. The Governor and Lieutenant Governor of Connecticut serve as ex officio members.

At Harvard University, there are two governing boards; one is the Board of Overseers, which is made up of alumni, and the other is the Corporation, which is made up of the President and Fellows. New members of the Board of Overseers are elected each spring “by Harvard degree holders (excluding officers of government or instruction at the University and members of the Corporation).” Fellows of the Corporation are appointed to their position. President of the University emeritus and professor of molecular biology and public affairs Shirley M. Tilghman has served as a Fellow at Harvard since 2016.

The Board of Overseers is tasked with a number of essential duties, including directing the visitation process, which is the “primary means for periodic external assessment of Harvard’s Schools and departments,” and it provides counsel to University leadership. The Corporation “exercises fiduciary responsibility with regard to the University’s academic, financial, and physical resources and overall well-being.”

The 39 largely-unknown members of the Princeton Board of Trustees hold enormous influence in determining the future of the University. Through an analysis of their time at Princeton, their political activity, and their personal wealth, this opaque institution becomes more transparent.

The next meeting for Princeton’s Board of Trustees will take place on May 12, 2023 on campus.

Ryan Konarska is an assistant Data editor for the ‘Prince.’ Lia Opperman is the Investigations editor for the ‘Prince.’

U-Store membership undercuts its competition in all but one product category

By Andrew Bosworth Data Contributor

The U-Store is, on average, the cheapest option for a broad range of campus essentials. Considering its proximity to most residential colleges, as well as the new policy which allows undergraduates on the unlimited dining plan to spend their $150 per semester of dining points or Paw Points at the U-Store or C-Store, the U-Store is especially convenient for students.

The ‘Prince’ analyzed prices of 27 of the U-Store’s more than 5,000 items and compared those prices to the prices of the same items from five convenience stores around or close to campus. The items were organized into six categories: beauty, beverage, grocery, health, household, and snack. The ‘Prince’ manually collected price data from the U-Store, C-Store, CVS, Wawa, and Princeton Convenience as well as Amazon, as an e-commerce alternative.

U-Store membership prices were also included as a potentially costsaving option. According to U-Store president Jim Sykes, “probably 80 to 90 percent of students become members.”

Prices of items were standardized by quantity across all stores. For example, a single deodorant stick’s price from Wawa for $3.99 is doubled to compare with a two-pack of UStore deodorant for $9.99.

The U-Store has lower prices than its competition in most categories. As a a non-profit organization, “the only reason [the U-Store] exist[s] is to serve this community,” Sykes said.

He also noted that the U-Store has benefited from Pay with Points, an Undergraduate Student Government initiative implemented in the fall of 2022. “The sales have been dramatically better since they implemented that [dining points],” Sykes said.

Wawa does not sell household goods and sells the most expensive snacks and health products. Amazon prices may be less expensive if students buy items in bulk, but were only analyzed in U-Store item sizes.

“A couple of times a year we try to do a price comparison with Wawa and generally CVS,” Sykes said. “We don’t really compare against Princeton Convenience Store. In the case of both CVS and Wawa, they are paying less than us from the vendors because they have much larger buying capability.”

Sykes said the U-Store is a hybrid between a convenience and grocery store in terms of pricing and selection.

There are other convenience stores in town. Princeton Convenience opened in September 2020 and focuses mainly on household goods, and its products are often more ex-

pensive. Amazon and the U-Store sell all the most common items analyzed while the C-Store sells the fewest. When one store’s pricing is far higher than the others, it is often Wawa or Princeton Convenience. Often the UStore membership or Amazon is the least expensive.

Wawa was not the least expensive option for any item analyzed.

When analyzing the prices of individual items, Amazon, followed by the U-Store, is often the low-priced store, even though Amazon is the most expensive option 26% of the time. This means that only 18% of Amazon items analyzed are not either the highest or lowest price for an item analyzed. Four of the stores analyzed offer memberships and additional savings, often at a cost. For higher-weight items, the U-Store is often the best option. With a Prime membership, Amazon ships for free, so their prices are higher for heavier items to compensate for lost shipping revenue.

CVS ships items for $5.49 and is free for orders above $40.49. All items analyzed for CVS are available at the Nassau Street location and online and can be ordered for pickup.

The U-Store, Amazon, and Wawa sell produce, which was not considered in this analysis. Amazon produce is sold through Whole Foods Fresh and is delivered within two hours, but Frist Campus Center mailing still has to process the shipment before it is retrievable. All custom

ers, including ones with a Prime sub

scription, are charged $9.95 in ship

ping on orders under $50, $6.95 on orders $50 – $100 , and $3.95 on orders from $100 – $150. Orders above $150 qualify for free shipping.

While the U-Store with membership is the most cost-effective in all categories but one, it is not always the most convenient. Rocky, Mathey, and colleges are closest to the UStore, Whitman is equidistant to the U-Store, C-Store, and Wawa, and Forbes, NCW, and Yeh are all closest to Wawa.

The two convenience stores located on Nassau Street are, on average, the furthest from all residential colleges and are open for the fewest hours per day after the C-Store.

The U-Store is open every day from 8 a.m. to 2 a.m., the C-Store is open every day from 11 a.m. to 11 p.m., Wawa is open 24 hours a day, every day, Princeton Convenience is open 7 a.m. to 12 a.m. weekdays and 8:30 a.m. to 12 a.m. on weekends, and CVS is open 7 a.m. to 11 p.m. every day.

Andrew Bosworth is a Data contributor.

"Staring C onte S t "

By Simon Marotte Head Puzzles Editor

ACROSS

1 Part of a date, often

6 Novelty headgear often sold in stadiums

8 *Revealing experience ... or an apt description of each of the answers to the starred clues as well as this puzzle's grid

10 Bugs in "A Bug's Life"

11 Fruit in many Playa Bowls

13 Jekyll's evil persona

14 Aquamarine, e.g.

17 Billboard Hot 100 listings

19 Fluid-containing pouches

20 Student ... or what's represented by the dot in the middle of this puzzle

22 Chops (off)

24 Hawks' and Bucks' org.

25 Old Farmer's ___

27 Bar code?

28 Put on, as a radio show

29 Tiger___ (Princeton enrollment site)

30 Megan Rapinoe's team

31 "I got, I got, I got, I got/ Loyalty, got royalty inside my ___" (Kendrick Lamar lyric)

32 Frequent fundraising org.

33 Cry after reaching the summit

35 Puppy's cry

36 Costco alternative, familiarly

38 Lose a staring contest

39 The "P" of P/D/F 40 Skier's conveyance

42 Spearheaded

43 Word after gold or sugar

44 Gel used in many bio labs

46 Questlove's hairstyle

47 *"Yes, captain"

51 Kicked out of the dorm room for a night, say

52 Birthplace of Wangari Muta Maathai, the first African woman to win a

3

When you think about COVID-19 risk, consider immunocompromised people

Hannah Faughnan guest contributor

The following is a guest contribution and reflects the author’s views alone.

In the winter of 2021, as Omicron, the latest COVID-19 variant was rising, the Princeton community attempted to bridge the formidable gap between practicing safety and moving beyond the pandemic. During this time, a classmate of mine made a statement that reflected the implications of the pandemic. This student, someone I’d consider a friend and is also rather well-informed on policy, told me: “We have to find a death rate that we are comfortable with.” Their words, of course, meant that the United States and the world as a whole would have to decide the point at which COVID-19 deaths were acceptable to allow economic and social growth.

Six months prior to this conversation and about a year into the pandemic, I was diagnosed with Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA). RA is an autoimmune disease where one’s immune system attacks the joints from the inside out. Before my diagnosis, I had characteristic pain and mobility issues — I was an incredibly sick child, but had difficulty getting doctors to believe that my symptoms existed for the entirety of my life. For the entirety of the pandemic, my mother, who has had ovarian, brain and lung cancers, and I have been placed in mortal danger by a disease that kills people with our exact same illnesses every day.

As an immunocompromised person, the statement of my classmate is horrifying, because I know that people like me are 42 percent more likely to die of COVID-19 if vaccinated, and

87 percent if unvaccinated. This reminder isn’t only present in the most extreme case of death or advertised in global data. Rather, I am reminded everyday as I sit in my classes. Oftentimes, I am one of very few wearing a mask, while my classmates around me frequently come to class while ill. Their coughing and sneezing, while even if not from COVID-19, could be an illness that could hospitalize me. My personal safety feels constantly at risk and distracts me from paying attention to the lecture — the only reason I attended in the first place.

Many other immunocompromised students have expressed similar discomfort or anxiety to me and through the Disability Collective. In the fall of 2021, when the “Princeton Plague” was overtaking campus, multiple immunocompromised students, myself included, contracted pneumonia from the cold that had been attacking our able-bodied (or pre-disabled) classmates. As I sat in McCosh Health Center with pneumonia, a sinus infection, and heart problems, a practitioner asked me why I “felt like” I was immunocompromised. Despite RA’s status as one of the most common autoimmune diseases, I still often face this lack of care or concern in the face of very serious and threatening illnesses. I know that I am not alone in these experiences, and that every immunocompromised person I’ve ever spoken to has their own onslaught of stories.

Many people claim it’s a personal choice when they choose not to mask. I don’t really wish to spark another debate about masks, but I will present a truth: public health measures are measures that keep people like me alive, but they also allow

me the freedom and independence to safely navigate the world. Masks are an easy and effective way to make a classroom or social space accessible for people like me. The current University masking policy states that the convener of an event may require or request masks. When I have approached professors to enact this rule for my and my classmates’ sake, I am met with resistance. As a Peer Academic Advisor (PAA), I was told that requesting my advisees to mask when meeting with me would affect the power dynamics between us. What is the power dynamic when my personal safety is at risk, and I am following University policy to protect myself and others? These experiences are all too common, and it creates a constant tension: spaces will tell me that they are accessible and inclusive, and then continue to resist when I advocate for my own safety.

While there are many struggles in being immunocompromised, there are also

many moments that have been incredibly encouraging. The people closest to me always take precautions, including testing frequently and keeping their distance if they even begin to have a sniffle. My work at the Scholars Institute Fellows Program (SIFP) allows me to request masks, offer outdoor programming, and design events around accessibility. I always find support in the Disability Collective and have had the opportunity to share my concerns in focus groups on the student experience during the pandemic and beyond. I have learned so much about making spaces accommodating and empathetic for all people around me.

The thing that sticks with me about my classmate’s sentiment is that we shouldn’t look at the death toll as just a number — we need to look at the composition of these deaths. Who are we okay with dying or suffering extreme illness? Who are we okay with expelling from society, either

through preventable, disease-related death, or from those individuals having to self-isolate for their own safety? Which community members are we willing to label as disposable through both words and actions, as my classmates do to myself and other immunocompromised students on our own campus?

I hope that my words here serve as a chance to learn about the experience of a disabled person navigating what often feels like a minefield, but also a call to action for Princeton students to make our community more accessible for people like me. I am not comfortable with any of our community members being lost, forgotten, or excluded. You shouldn’t be either.

Hannah Faughnan is a senior from Leesburg, Fla. She can be reached at faughnan@princeton.edu.

Add/drop should be a time for exploration, not stress

Ndeye Thioubou Senior Columnist

During the first two weeks of every Princeton semester, students have the opportunity to toy with their schedules freely. Over this period, referred to as add/drop, students are afforded flexibility in changing the schedule they created during course registration by adding or dropping any number of courses. Many students take great advantage of this, as initial schedules are often only reflective of whatever classes are still open during registration. After the add/drop period, as per the Office of the Registrar, students can no longer add courses and will incur a $45 fee for each course dropped. The reality of add/drop does not always allow students the opportunity to optimize their schedules, which is why I am calling on the University to reform and restructure this two week period, as well as drop the inequitable $45 fee.

The main problem with the current form of add/ drop is that most instructors begin assigning coursework and assignments during the first or second week. The purpose of add/ drop is to have the entire

two-week period to revise and develop your schedule, but when coursework enters the equation, students may avoid switching courses because of having to deal with a backlog of work. I know that I am not alone in avoiding fully exploring course options because by adding a new class during add/drop, I would be entering a couple steps behind. My concerns were expressed by Senior Columnist Ava Milberg in a 2021 piece, where she noted how difficult it is to fully catch up after falling behind given how accelerated the Princeton academic calendar is. It is this accelerated nature of the Princeton semester that makes it all the more vital for students to actually be able to use add/drop in the way that it was intended.

It is understandable that professors want to be able to get started with their course content, but this has to be balanced with students’ needs to create optimal schedules. I propose that professors should only start assigning coursework during the second class meeting of the second week of add/drop. For classes that meet twice a week, this would allow a student to attend three class meetings before having to fully prepare for the class and com -

plete assignments. Though faculty would need to modify their syllabi around this requirement, this change would greatly benefit Princeton students and allow for much more academic exploration during add/drop. This modification would translate into an improved classroom experience for students since they would still be able to get a sense of what the workload of the class feels like before the add/drop period is over. With the current nature of add/drop, it can feel like the semester starts on the wrong foot before it even begins.

Reforming add/drop is also a matter of equity. For First Generation Low Income (FGLI) Princetonians in particular, $45 may be a significant amount of money. Some FGLI students have likely already grappled with the financial burden they face when dropping a class past add/drop or the academic burden of staying in a class that is not a good fit for them. Restructuring the add/drop period should in itself reduce the amount of students who even have to drop a course past it, but FGLI students still should not have to incur a fee for dropping a course. Yet, one has to wonder why there is a fee for dropping a class

in the first place. There is no transparency on the part of the University on where these fees are being directed, and it seems unfair to arbitrarily charge amounts without a rational basis behind it.

I spoke to Tope Alowonle ’25 about the challenges she faced during add/drop this semester. Alowonle, who plans to declare Sociology, was unable to get into two courses during course registration and most of the add/drop period due to both being full: SPI200: Statistics for Social Science and SPI350: The Environment: Science and Policy. After speaking to multiple administrators in the SPIA department, Alowonle was able to get into both. However, because of the current format of add/drop, where many professors begin assigning coursework during the first week, Alowonle started the semester with extensive work to catch up on. She described this experience as very “stressful,” believing that she “should just be able to experience the first week instead of having to worry about 350 pages of reading for one course, or 200 pages of reading for another course.”

Alowonle’s struggles during add/drop illustrate the urgent need for reform.

Alowonle summed up add/drop’s importance: “The professor makes or breaks the course. The structure makes or breaks the course.” This is exactly why it is critical for all Princetonians to use add/ drop as a time to understand a professor’s teaching style and course structure, see if it is compatible with their learning style, and then make a decision on whether to keep or drop the course. Yet, currently many students are deprived of this ability. If they are not spending most of add/drop simply trying to get into a class, they are being hit with multiple assignments that take up the time they are supposed to be using to finalize their schedule.

Alowonle concluded our conversation by stating, “If you are telling students that there is an add/drop period for two weeks, they should actually be able to experience it. I wasn’t able to experience it.” Princeton, let us truly experience add/ drop.

Ndeye Thioubou is a sophomore from The Bronx, N.Y. She can be reached at nthioubou@ princeton.edu.

ANGEL KUO / THE DAILY PRINCETONIAN

The Office of Disability Services has made significant progress in making campus more accessible

Liz Erickson Guest Contributor

The following is a guest contribution and reflects the author’s views alone.

The Office of Disability Services (ODS)

was established 16 years ago with the primary mission of serving students with disabilities. ODS quickly became a point of contact for anyone in our campus community who had questions about access. Over the years, ODS’ work has grown, and there have been many changes across campus in accommodating students and improving access within the physical, as well as the digital, spaces of campus. Yet unless a student is involved in this work, it may be difficult to recognize the many efforts and initiatives that have taken place and are ongoing to improve the experience of students with disabilities and increase access for our entire community.

Princeton is one of the most rigorous and challenging institutions in the world for all students, but disability adds another layer of challenge. Disabilities affect students’ ability to navigate academics, traverse campus, and participate in extracurricular activities, while also requiring many to engage in treatment and care for their disability. It is therefore essential that we create an environment where students with disabilities can thrive too. ODS has had a profound impact on Princeton — and we hope to continue this progress in the future.

The Office of Disability Services provides students with all types of disabilities — including mental health, cognitive, physical, sensory, medical, and even temporary — with a staff of administrators to support them. ODS staff have the challenging job of providing access for students with disabilities within the specific landscape of a Princeton education. ODS staff also welcome students to come and discuss things they

are struggling with even if they don’t have a diagnosed disability. Staff will recommend resources outside of accommodations, such as different helpful technologies, and may further provide direction on how to get testing or other treatments. Anyone who visits the office will find friendly staff and a jar full of M&M’s.

ODS also recognized that students with disabilities did not have a space or voice on campus as other marginalized populations did. In 2017, the AccessAbility Center was launched to provide a universally accessible gathering space and programming to advance awareness of disability, ability, and difference. Student fellows drive programming to increase understanding of disability, advocate for access, promote stress relief, and generally advance awareness of how disability brings richness to the diversity of our campus.

Over the years, ODS has advocated for new and different accommodations as society and student life have changed. When ODS was established, very few students with mental health disabilities requested accommodations. Currently, students with mental health disabilities are the largest sector of students receiving accommodations, along with those who have learning disabilities and ADHD. ODS has approved accommodations that specifically support students with mental health disabilities and aims to consider all accommodations students request.

As construction on campus has expanded, it has impacted the entire campus community, but especially those who have physical or sensory disabilities. ODS has collaborated with facilities administrators to monitor changes to walkways and routes and provided timely updates in accessible formats for students who are blind or have mobility disabilities.

The new dormitories have been designed with improved access including elevators, rooms that meet the accommodation needs of students,

and different configurations for bathrooms. Constituents across many units on campus spent months at the design stage of Hobson College discussing how to create a space that is inclusive and accessible for our diverse student body. Physical access has been a priority even outside the construction of new buildings — ODS has supported administrators working to improve transportation and navigation. A great deal of discussion has resulted in a revised transportation system, including a fleet of new electric buses that enable an individual using a wheelchair to independently secure themselves inside the bus. Transportation and Parking also launched a supplementary Tiger Access shuttle to support people on campus with mobility concerns by providing curb-to-curb rides around campus. This has been an incredible support for students who use wheelchairs or have medical conditions that make it difficult to walk long distances. The University has also improved wayfinding on campus by installing maps and nudge signs, which give directions to accessible routes. There is also a digital wayfinding program in development, which will enable point-topoint navigation that can be filtered to create an accessible

route. Because improving physical access on a historic campus located on a hill is an ongoing process, the University recently hired a director for campus accessibility to lead future efforts to increase physical access.

Accessibility in digital spaces can often be overlooked by people who do not have disabilities, but it is imperative for people with vision and hearing disabilities, as well as those with many other disabilities such as ADHD and epilepsy.

The University recognizes our community and the general public must have appropriate access to our websites, and staff have spent untold hours remediating over 50 of the University’s most prominent and public-facing websites to be accessible and compliant with Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.0 AA standards. Students who have vision disabilities also require fully remediated course materials to be able to read, so ODS partners with Firestone Library staff to locate course materials and remediate them so that these students are able to access their course materials in a timely manner.

ODS has done (and will continue to do) a great deal to support disabled students, but there is also a role for administrators, faculty, and students who, regardless of their abil-

ity, care deeply about making our campus accessible. The AccessAbility Center recently launched a program to create “Allies for Access.” To establish a foundational understanding of disability, prospective allies must take a training course after which they receive certification as one of Princeton’s Allies for Access. ODS surveyed campus constituents with disabilities in Fall 2022 to determine what allies on Princeton’s campus should know, and recommendations from the survey were incorporated into the training program. If you would like to become one of our Allies for Access, email ability@ princeton.edu to sign up for our training on May 2.

Improving access, services, and resources for students and others with disabilities on our campus is an ongoing endeavor. With the support of allies on campus, students advocating for access, and administrators making improvements with intentionality, I hope that we can continue to be welcoming to people with different abilities on our campus.

Liz Erickson has been Princeton’s director of disability services since 2016. She can be contacted at eerickso@princeton.edu.

The Young Alumni Trustee election process is a disgrace

The following is a guest contribution and reflects the author’s views alone.

I’m running for Young Alumni Trustee (YAT).

For those unfamiliar, the YAT is a senior elected by members of the junior and senior classes, as well as the two most recent graduating classes, who joins the University’s Board of Trustees as a member for four years. The YAT has all the same powers as the other trustee members, responsible for managing the University’s funds, planning, endowment, and governance. I would love to tell you why I think I’m qualified to be this year’s YAT and what I would advocate for as a trustee so you can make an informed decision when you vote. Unfortunately, I’m not allowed to.

YAT candidates are strictly prohibited from any kind of campaigning. Why does the University have such an odd rule? Well, according to them, “Trustees who arrive on the board having already staked out positions on issues without access to full information can undermine both the workings of the board and their own effectiveness if they are perceived

as beholden to a position.”

The University is intent on making the YAT, and each member of the Board of Trustees in general, appear as a purely technocratic blank slate that governs us devoid of any discernible agendas, priorities, or political leanings. “Partisanship detracts from this sense of shared responsibility and thus is detrimental in both the election process and participation in the board,” the University says. Yet the notion that politics and ideology have nothing to do with University policy is nonsense.

Every decision the trustees make, from where they invest the University’s money to the construction projects they approve, is political and ideological, whether the trustees are aware of it or not. Investing in a given fund or company supports their operations and is thus an implicit endorsement of that company’s practices, department funding conveys how important the University believes certain subjects are, and so on. Furthermore, the Board of Trustees oversees an institution that impacts the lives of thousands of people every day and governs an endowment that exceeds the wealth of some countries. Another excuse the University employs is that their

campaign restriction serves as an equalizer among the candidates, preventing a kind of campaign arms race that could potentially overwhelm seniors with postering and speeches, especially as they work on their senior theses. Of course, the University could easily solve this problem by regulating campaigning, either through restricting it to one debate or campaign statements, or creating a designated area for posters. Instead, they’ve chosen to hide behind an unconvincing concern for student well-being as a means of limiting our right to speak.

So why is the University so concerned about the YAT position being seen as apolitical, so much so that they have outlawed campaigning? I can’t claim to know for sure, but the University appears to be afraid of what might happen if students could campaign on serious issues. Perhaps someone with unconventional or even radical ideas for what the University ought to be doing with its resources and influence might be elected. It’s much safer, from the University’s perspective, to restrain any potential debate in this election and turn it into a popularity contest, in which the students with pre-existing name recognition have the advantage.

We then end up electing a YAT based on who their friends are, what clubs they’re in, or simply by guessing what the candidates will do as trustees based on the little we know about them, instead of anything substantive. No wonder turnout rates for this race have been abysmal in the past. Students clearly understand that without a campaign, this election is a farce.

For a University with a purported commitment to free speech and democracy, this is highly hypocritical. Apparently, Princeton values freedom of expression and democratic accountability only in purely theoretical, academic settings. When the finances and governance of the University are at stake, as it is in this election, Princeton shows its authoritarian side. University community members, especially students, alumni, and professors who are concerned with the state of free speech rights on campus, ought to be outraged by this.

I suspect the University might disqualify me from YAT candidacy after publishing this article, though I did take care not to engage in any actual campaigning in this piece. Nonetheless, my disqualification would only further confirm my argument that the

administration is afraid of what a real campaign focused on issues might yield. Perhaps there will even be a polite reply from the University in the Opinion section of The Daily Princetonian in the coming days, likely repeating the same talking points about the importance of apolitical elections that I have already quoted. I encourage readers not to be such easy marks. This is censorship, plain and simple, designed to shut down the robust, passionate debate we should be having about the future of this institution—and the future of higher education—before it even begins.

Of course, I sincerely hope this does not happen, and that the University not only leaves me on the ballot, but allows all candidates to campaign. Even if the restrictions aren’t lifted, I would encourage whichever candidates advance to the final round to find some courage this year and hold a debate, whether the school approves of it or not. Only then do we have a chance of electing a YAT that accurately represents a majority of students’ views.

Ben Gelman is a senior from Houston, Texas concentrating in Politics. He can be reached at bgelman@princeton.edu.

Benjamin Gelman Guest Contributor

NAOMI HESS / THE DAILY PRINCETONIAN

The exterior of the Office of Disability Services in Frist Campus Center.

vol. cxlvii

editor-in-chief

Rohit Narayanan '24

business manager

Shirley Ren ’24 BOARD OF TRUSTEES

president Thomas E. Weber ’89

vice president

David Baumgarten ’06

secretary

Chanakya A. Sethi ’07

treasurer Douglas Widmann ’90

assistant treasurer

Kavita Saini ’09

trustees Francesca Barber

Craig Bloom ’88

Kathleen Crown

Let’s recognize autistic people with love and support

Chambers Guest Contributor

Suzanne Dance ’96

Gabriel Debenedetti ’12

Stephen Fuzesi ’00

Zachary A. Goldfarb ’05

Michael Grabell ’03

John G. Horan ’74

Danielle Ivory ’ 05

Rick Klein ’98

James T. MacGregor ’66

Julianne Escobedo Shepherd

Abigail Williams ’14

Tyler Woulfe ’07

trustees ex officio

Rohit Narayanan ’24

Shirley Ren ’24

147TH MANAGING BOARD

upper management

Kalena Blake ’24

Katherine Dailey ’ 24

Julia Nguyen ’ 24

Angel Kuo 24

Hope Perry ’ 24

Strategic initiative directors

Archivist

Gabriel Robare ’24

Education

Kareena Bhakta ’ 24

Amy Ciceu ’ 24

Financial Stipend Program

Genrietta Churbanova 24

Mobile Reach

Rowen Gesue ’24

DEIB Chair

Christofer Robles ’25

Sections listed in alphabetical order.

head audience editor

Rowen Gesue ’24

associate audience editors

Laura Robertson ’24

Paige Walworth ’26

head copy editors

Jason Luo ’25

Nathalie Verlinde ’24

associate head copy editors

Tiffany Cao ’24

Naisha Sylvestre ’25

head data editor

Elaine Huang ’25

Charlie Roth ’25

head features editors

Paige Cromley ’24

Tori Tinsley ’24

associate features editor

Sejal Goud ’25

head graphics editors

Noreen Hosny ’25

Katelyn Ryu ’25

head humor editors

Spencer Bauman ’25

Liana Slomka ’23

associate humor editors

Sam McComb ’25

Sophia Varughese ’26

head news editors

Sandeep Mangat ’24

Isabel Yip ’25

associate news editors

Lia Opperman ’25

Annie Rupertus ’25

Tess Weinreich ’25

head newsletter editors

Olivia Chen ’26

Sidney Singer ’25

associate newsletter editor

Aly Rashid ’26

head opinion editor

Abigail Rabieh ’25

community opinion editor

Lucia Wetherill ’25

associate opinion editors

Eleanor Clemans-Cope ’26

Ashley Olenkiewicz ’25

head photo editor

Jean Shin ’26

head podcast editor

Eden Teshome ’25

associate podcast editors

Senna Aldoubosh ’25

Kavya Kamath ’26

head print design editors

Avi Chesler ’25

Malia Gaviola ’26

head prospect editors

Kerrie Liang ’25

Claire Shin ’25

associate prospect editors

Isabella Dail ’26

Joshua Yang ’25

head puzzles editors

Joah Macosko ’25

Simon Marotte ’26

associate puzzles editors

Juliet Corless ’24

Sarah Gemmell ’24

Jaeda Woodruff ’25

head sports editors

Nishka Bahl ’26

Wilson Conn ’25

associate sports editors

Cole Keller ’26

Brian Mhando ’26

head web design and development editors

Ananya Grovr ’24

Brett Zeligson ’24

associate web design and development editor

Vasila Mirshamsova ’26

147TH BUSINESS BOARD

assistant business manager

Aidan Phillips ’25

business directors

Benjamin Cai ’24

Juliana Li ’24

Samantha Lee ’24

Gabriel Gullett ’25

Amanda Cai ’25

Jonathan Lee ’24

project managers

Brian Zhou ’26

Sophia Shepherd ’26

Andrew He ’26

Diya Dalia ’24

Tejas Iyer ’26

Laura Zhang ’26

Dauen Kim ’26

Julia Cabri ’24

Jessica Funk ’26

Tony Ye ’23

Anika Agarwal ’25

147TH TECHNOLOGY BOARD

chief technology officer

Joanna Tang ’24

lead software engineer

Roma Bhattacharjee ’25

software engineers

Eugenie Choi ’24

Carter Costic ’26

Dylan Esptein-Gross ’26

Ishaan Javali ’26

Adam Kelch ’26

Tai Sanh Nguyen ’26

John Ramirez ’26

Aidan Phillips ’25

Jessie Wang ’25

Shannon Yeow ’26

Brett Zeligson ’24

THIS PRINT ISSUE WAS DESIGNED BY

Vanessa Auth ’26

Avi Chesler ’25

Malia Gaviola ’26

Annabel Green ’26

The following is a guest contribution and reflects the author’s views alone.

“Are you familiar with autism?” At first, the question seemed strange. I studied autism spectrum disorders (ASDs), worked at a summer camp for people with ASDs, and presented research on the dissonance between medical and social models of ASDs. My ongoing independent work investigates neural synchrony as a possible neurobiological mechanism for ASDs. But the psychiatrist was not interested in my academic endeavors. He was asking if I was familiar with autism in myself.

I wasn’t, and as I recognized my own ASD, I realized that the University community is not familiar with autistic students either. Certain University spaces perpetuate harmful misconceptions that serve to make myself and other autistic Princetonians invisible. It was only when I gained an understanding of ASDs and found people who understood disability, that I was able to unmask. To truly support other autistic people, especially those who are a part of our University community, Princeton students and staff should endeavor to reach the same understanding.

My family did not readily recognize my ASD because ASDs are highly heritable. Foremost hypotheses on the etiology of ASDs describe the condition as an endophenotype, a diverse and nonspecific combination of genetic alterations that produce specific characteristics. When these characteristics reach a critical magnitude, they meet the criteria for diagnosis. In other words, people inherit some traits and develop their own, and when one person presents multiple autistic traits, that satisfies a socially defined threshold for diagnosis. Because ASDs are highly heritable, parents sometimes fail to identify autistic behaviors in their children. To the parent who shares the child’s behavior, the behavior is unremarkable.

My mother shared many of the traits that qualified me for an ASD diagnosis. We both felt uncomfortable and avoided large social gatherings. The past academic year, I ate meals in my dorm instead of the dining hall because the noise of dozens of conversations overwhelmed me.

Social discomfort extends to social interactions, too. For me, social cues are difficult. I tried to join Club Swim, the Princeton Running Club, and the various improv troupes, but I was intimidated. I never understood certain social expectations — how often to attend, how much to talk, who to talk to, what to talk about. The fears seem trivial, but without clear expectations in the past, I failed to incorporate myself into swimming and running teams at home. I participated as an athlete but rarely as a person.

Because of my work with children with ASDs, I also naturally adopted masking strategies — smiling when speaking, nodding when listening, sleeping with weighted blankets, carrying fidget spinners, and asking for breaks during long meetings and classes. I also easily adopted some basic social rules that might not be innate or obvious to me, but I understood once someone explained them. The world seemed keen on allowing me to pass.

As a result, I only received my ASD diagnosis in October 2022. The previous semester, I approached a professor about difficulties sitting for exams. During virtual exams, I could stand and stretch in the middle of a long-essay response. Alone, I was never distracted by the shuffling of people, the clicking of pens, and the constant sneezes and sniffling during allergy season. After explaining that I usually stretch every hour and wear noise-canceling headphones during an exam, my professor asked, “Why don’t you have accommodations?”

Her question prompted a referral for neuropsychology testing where I was eventually diagnosed with ASD, Generalized Anxiety Disorder, and Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder. I received accommodations — extended time, exam breaks, and an emotional support animal. However, old problems remained, and new problems emerged.

I soon noticed a disconnect between people’s expectations of ASDs and my life as an autistic person. For example, after confiding in a friend that I received a diagnosis of ASD, she stared at me confused and retorted, “You don’t seem autistic.” When I struggled to navigate the eating clubs, I confided in a friend in a Bicker club that running between unfamiliar and loud spaces and jumping into conversations with new people would overstimulate me. I explained that I felt unable to bicker, and he much too readily agreed, telling me, “Yeah, you’d never make it.” To him, the process of Bicker was not inaccessible to me for a clear, medical reason. Instead, he believed that I was just too “weird” to be wanted.

I also began noticing hurtful misconceptions when people mentioned ASDs in courses.

As a student in the neuroscience department, my lecturers often discuss ASDs. Current statistics indicate that 1 in 36 young people receive an ASD diagnosis. However, contrary to discussions about anxiety and depression, professors often do not recognize the space ASDs fill in our campus. More often, I see photos of white boys playing with puzzles — both on online resources and in lecture slides. Professors continually show my peers that ASDs are children who cannot maintain eye contact and sometimes cannot speak. Where are the autistic adults? Where are the Black autistic people? Where are the queer autistic people? Where are the autistic Princetonians?

Where am I?

More than making autistic Princetonians invisible, professors presented inaccurate, outdated, and sometimes in-

sulting information about ASDs. To reiterate, foremost hypotheses describe ASDs as an endophenotype — a heritable trait. Nonetheless, a neuroscience professor proclaimed to an entire lecture hall that ASDs result from damage to the cerebellum despite traumatic brain injuries and interpersonal trauma representing distinct diagnoses separate from ASDs. He called my brain damaged. Another professor maintained on an exam that ASDs result from “a lack of proper input for social development” even though that idea was historically used to blame mothers for their children’s innate disabilities. During a seminar on ASDs, a psychology professor only assigned readings about nonspeaking or minimally speaking autistic people, and after I asked for articles written by autistic people, he told me that he had never read one.

Despite difficulties adjusting socially and within my department, I found a space that understood me. At the end of Fall 2021, when I still checked the listservs, I read an email about a position working with the AccessAbility Center. The center is a gathering space designed for universal access and for fostering conversation about disability. Our mission is to see disability as a part of diversity. Luckily, I became a fellow.

The center offered numerous social and sensory supports: therapy dogs during midterms and finals season, standing desks, sensory lights, white noise machines, and fidgets. The conscious and proactive steps towards accessibility in the AccessAbility Center ensure that everyone, myself included, possesses the resources to be safe, comfortable, and productive.

I also found my people at the AccessAbility Center. Spring 2022, during a formal biannual meeting, I needed to move and fidget. Instead of excusing myself, I asked for a 10-minute break. During the break, I started doing jumping jacks. My coworker Topaz Winters ’23 smiled, laughed, and said, “I love you.” The center attracted people who understood disability and encouraged me to unmask. Because of them, I found a version of myself with fewer masks.

I am autistic. For me, supports such as clear email communication and mid-meeting jumping jacks are necessary. In the AccessAbility Center, I don’t have to abandon that need, because it is provided without question and with a smile. I am autistic, but I never identified with that label until I found people who understood disability. To support autistic Princetonians, the wider Princeton community should develop the same understanding and acceptance as the AccessAbility Center so that I and other autistic people can feel seen on Princeton campus, and so we can hear the word “love” instead of “weird.”

Harper Chambers is a junior in the Department of Neuroscience and an AccessAbility Center Fellow. He can be contacted at harperrc@princeton.edu.

Rachel Seo ’26

Cindy Chen ’26

Vivi Lu ’26

AND COPIED BY

Lindsay Pagaduan ’26

Harper

the PROSPECT.

Hit the sweet spot with Coffee Club’s spring drinks

By Isabella Dail | Associate Prospect Editor

Some of my favorite places to spend my dining points are at the Coffee Club’s two locations on campus. I frequently trek down to the modern New College West (NCW) storefront that overlooks Poe Field before an afternoon of studying. I also love the quaint café at Campus Club, with its homey vibe and frequent musical performances. Typically, I go for the basic, predictable iced vanilla latte. However, Coffee Club seasonally experiments with its menu and releases temporary items that reflect the weather, holidays, or mood of the campus. With the slowlywarming temperature of late-March and sunnier days, it was officially time for the collection of four new spring drinks to be unveiled. As a committed Coffee Club fan, I sought to break away from my conventional order and try them all.

These are the seasonal drinks to look out for:

1. Honey Lavender

Latte I have a bit of a bias in favor of this drink, as I suggested the idea for it via a social media survey by the Coffee Club a few weeks ago. But let me say, this drink is exactly what I envisioned when I had requested for it to be included on the menu. I

opted for the iced version, and it was a perfectly refreshing beverage to sip as I walked to Firestone on a warm day. The honey adds a soft sweetness to the coffee, while the underlying notes of lavender bring a floral depth to the drink. It’s an unexpected flavor combination, but the Coffee Club balanced all the different aspects of the latte harmoniously. This spring, an iced honey lavender latte might become my new staple and officially replace the iced vanilla latte indefinitely.

2. Coconut Cold Foam Cold Brew

Although I am most often found at the NCW Coffee Club, I ventured to Campus Club in search of this coconut coffee, as the NCW location is not yet making this drink. However, it will be coming to NCW soon, so stay tuned!

Although the honey lavender latte is my favorite of the spring drinks, I enjoyed this coffee more than I expected. The strong cold brew propelled me through the rest of my eventful day. For people less interested in overly sugary drinks, this is a suitable option. The coconut foam adds a touch of sweetness once mixed in, but the layers of flavor are subtler, and the coffee has a more dominating taste. Additionally, the coconut foam was presented beautifully as a frothy layer dolloped atop

the coffee. I recommend this drink particularly as a caffeine boost for people with a long day of studying ahead of them.

3. Guava Mango Hibiscus Iced Tea

As a serious coffee lover, I was a little reluctant to deviate as far as tea. After trying the drink, I have decided that I still prefer a good cup of iced coffee. But, as far as tea goes, the guava mango hibiscus iced tea was an energizing option that reminded me of the slowly approaching summer. At first sight, the rich, dark red color of the drink is stunning. Additionally, the blend of teas balances a tart, fruity flavor with a mellow sweetness. Although I was unable to distinguish between the guava, mango, and hibiscus, I appreciate the combination of floral essences that the blend creates. This tea is perfect to drink outside on a temperate morning day after having a preliminary cup of coffee. My only complaint is the rather long name of the drink, which I most certainly fumbled when placing my order. The spring drinks, however, are conveniently labeled on a special board behind the counter, so it really isn’t that intimidating.

4. Honey Matcha

From my spring drink tasting sessions, I have learned that I am not a

mat

cha

person. The green tea flavor is too earthy for my taste. Although mat cha slowly grew on me, I didn’t enjoy the honey matcha latte quite like the oth er spring drinks. However, I do think the matcha is a fitting choice for spring. The soft color evokes the pastel palette fre quently associated with the season, and the tinted greenness reminded me of the blooming of spring. Additionally, the un derlying flavors of honey complement the sweetness of the other spring drinks and ties the beverages’ theme to gether.

The Coffee Club spring drinks are a bright, re freshing collection that welcome the warmer sea sons with their vibrant colors and sweet flavor profiles. At the very least, you’ll see me with an iced honey lavender latte for the rest of the year.

Isabella Dail is a firstyear and an associate edi tor for The Prospect at the ‘Prince.’ She can be reached at id7289@princeton.edu.

For all the tigers who love being tigers

March 24, 2023, will go down as one of those days that somehow encapsulates everything I love about being a Princeton Tiger. It began with a thesis presentation, continued with a smiling singer, crescendoed on the basketball court, and dwindled with a quiet conversation heading home.

I’d spent the preceding week abuzz from the basketball teams’ victories and a little anxious for my Friday morning thesis presentation for the European Cultural Studies certificate. Since my own thesis advisor currently serves as the certificate program’s director, all I wanted was to not fall flat; to even impress or excel would feel miraculous. I’d put so much weight on this thesis and myself for the past year. It was the culmination of my college career; I wanted to be proud of my work and not disappoint myself or all the people who’ve supported me along the way.

Sometimes, while presenting for a group, I’ll break into a sweat, which can then spiral. On Friday morning, as I collected my script and connected my slideshow to the screen, I braced for the worst. But as I cautiously revved up to speed, I found an unfamiliar flow, even a state of zen, perhaps. Everything melted away as I swept through the figures and photos, the problems and ideas I’ve come to know inside and out — and come to love. And I remembered that despite my working with long-ago historical events and distant theories, I was really trying to make sense of myself in this world. In juggling questions of how nations created a new international order in the early 20th century and then represented this world architecturally, I was really trying, once more, to find another way to make sense of my own existence in a life spread across continents and oceans. As I explained my words and answered questions, all I could feel was this joy of being here, now, getting to do this for myself.

And then, after a lunchtime meeting of the Commencement Committee, where some 30 of my classmates and I worked to shape a triumphant, memorable, and celebratory conclusion to this rocky ride of a college experience, I headed to the Campus Club basement. Waiting in a dreadfully long (but fortunately speedy) line brought

about by the Coffee Club’s free spring drink deal, I focused across the room where my friend, Kate Short ’23, a superstar singer-songwriter, stood behind a microphone, guitar in hand. As I slowly shuffled forward, ordered a free honey lavender latte, iced with oat milk, and picked it up for a slow sip, I couldn’t help but smile as Kate dazzled with an original song, a Fleetwood Mac classic, and Caroline Polachek’s “So Hot You’re Hurting My Feelings” — a personal favorite, especially as covered by Kate in a slowed-down, soulful tempo.

I smiled along to each of those songs, occasionally mouthing along to the lyrics, enjoying every beat. I smiled because it brought back memories of the Thursday night before spring break. It was a night that began bopping around with so many friends at Tower’s St. Patrick’s Daythemed party, and it continued with even more friends at Terrace, where Kate was performing many of the same songs. I probably saw nearly all my closest friends that night, in too much green or losing their minds to a Phoebe Bridgers cover. I smiled remembering that night that brought so much joy, both euphoric and soothing. It was a night I got to spend in one of my favorite places: anywhere in the world next to Marie-Rose Sheinerman ’23 — Editorin-Chief Emerita, as this paper’s style guide requires me to mention, and friend, as I hope to always say.

But maybe more than anything, what made me smile most between sips of coffee, was the beaming smile Kate snuck in between lyrics. It was just an infectious joy, radiating through the room — the sort of joy possible only when it’s clear that someone is doing the thing they love so much that the world would be bankrupt without them and their passion and joy.

I took my coffee to my afternoon translation class which flew by, and then I headed back to Tower to wait for dinner with more friends and then a watch party for Princeton’s Sweet Sixteen appearance.

Between rebounds and free throws, between killer blocks and three-pointers that were nothing but net, I was inundated by a sea of orange and black — in the club, across campus, in cities around the world, and, of course, in the Louisville arena. It was an endless stream of images and sounds of Tigers cheering on Tigers. It was

as if every single person who had ever walked the campus had paused their lives to support the 16 players who had donned the orange and black jersey that night.

Between cheers and shouts, I’d catch friends pointing out the player in their class, living on the same dorm floor, in their freshman year zee group, and so on. During commercial breaks, I’d scroll Twitter just to see professors, journalists, politicians, and countless others posting various combinations of Princeton symbols and phrases, as if everyone who’s anyone out in the world was once and still a Tiger at heart. And during halftime, I chuckled along to Head Sports Editor Wilson Conn’s livestream on this paper’s Instagram account while other writers and editors cheered him on in the comments.

Even as the game closed on a loss and the camera feed locked in on shots of the players who seemed on the verge of tears, provoking ‘aww’s and applause in the room around me, all I could dwell on was the energizing warmth and love of an entire community together, one ambush of Tigers taking on the world, all looking out for each other. Those are the feelings that define my favorite moments at this funny school. I only hope and wish for countless more — though the looming graduation currently seems destined to diminish the number and frequency of these moments in my life compared to the last few years.

Then, as midnight approached, after I’d moved Tower’s couches back to their place from their game-viewing location, I ended the day with Cecilia Zubler ’23 once more. (An associate head copy editor emerita at this paper, a friend, you know how it goes.) Our conversation standing around a club quickly emptying out became one while walking home. It was the perfect way to end the day. The walk and talk reminded me of the comfort of a friend who just gets you and of how lucky I am to have one just like that.

How lucky am I that I get to love all this. How lucky am I to have and love this Princeton life. How lucky we Tigers are.

José Pablo Fernández García is a senior from Ohio and Head Editor Emeritus for The Prospect at the ‘Prince.’ He can be reached at jpgarcia@princeton.edu.

By José Pablo Fernández García | Head Prospect Editor

The Prospect 11 Weekly Event Roundup

By Senior

Prospect Contributor Lauren Fromkin

DEFINITION

Six14 Christian Dance Frist Theatre

March 30 at 7 p.m., March 31 at 7 p.m., and April 1 at 6 p.m. and 9 p.m.

If you’re looking to enjoy a show from one of Princeton’s many dance groups, Six14 Christian Dance Company is performing their 10-year anniversary show this weekend. You can buy tickets online through University Ticketing or in person on the 200- level of Frist.

Comedian Alex Edelman: Just For Us

Comedian Alex Edelman

McCosh 10

April 3 at 7 p.m.

Award-winning comedian Alex Edelman will perform his Drama Desk Award-nominated, one-man comedy show about a white supremacist meeting in NYC that Edelman, who is Jewish, attended. This show is described as “a funny, touching, and insightful one-man show …exploring issues such as white privilege, anti semitism, and racism.” If a comedy show is what you’re looking for, you can register for this event on My PrincetonU.

Screening of “The Five Demands”

Princeton’s Events

James Stewart Film Theater, 185 Nassau Street

April 3 at 7:30 p.m.

Meet the festival director and filmmakers over Zoom to discuss the films screened the day prior, Feb. 17, and which are available on-demand the whole week. This event is hosted by Festival Director Jane Steuerwald, Festival Associate and juror Henry Baker, and Curator Emerita of the National Gallery of Art Margaret Parsons. freezes all around campus.

4 SEE Black Renaissance Dance Showcase

Screening of “Janet Wide

Awake: The HedgepethWilliams

Dream”

Princeton University Music Department

Woolworth Center Room 102

April 4 at 4:30 p.m.

“Janet Wide Awake: The Hedgepeth-Williams Dream” is, according to the University’s music department website, “a play about the history of desegregation in Trenton as told through the stories of two mothers, Gladys Hedgepeth and Berline Williams.” There are no tickets required, and light refreshments will be served at the screening.

Masterclass with Mark Peskanov, Violinist

Violinist Mark Peskanov

Taplin Auditorium, Fine Hall

April 4 at 4:30 p.m.

This masterclass, sponsored by the Donna Weng Friedman ’80 Masterclass Series, will be taught by American virtuoso violinist Mark Peskanov. Following the workshop, Peskanov will perform a concert at 7:30 p.m. presenting Adolphus Hailstork’s Baroque Suite, Beethoven’s Sonata No. 1 in D Major, and Edvard Grieg’s Sonata No. 3 in C Minor, with pianist Donna Weng Friedman ’80.

Dorobucci

Richardson Auditorium

April 7 at 7 p.m. and April 8 at 5 p.m.

In this performance, Princeton’s premier African Dance Company, Dorobucci, will be joined by the High Steppers, the Black Arts Company, and the African Music Ensemble. All of these groups will showcase styles of music and dance from the African diaspora.

Masterclass and Concert with Mark Kroll, Harpsichord and Carol Lieberman, Baroque Violin

Princeton University Music Department

Taplin Auditorium, Fine Hall

April 2 at 11 a.m.

The music department website describes this event as “a day of music celebrating ‘Italian Music and its Legacy,’ [beginning with] a masterclass by Baroque violinist Carol Lieberman and harpsichordist Mark Kroll,featuring Princeton University students.” Following the master class, Kroll will lead a discussion on.“the influences of early Italian music on Baroque music,” at 2:30 p.m. Finally, at 3 p.m., Kroll and Lieberman will perform music by de Cabezón, Frescobaldi, Biber, Handel, and Domenico Scarlatti.

Concert with Alina Ibragimova, Violin and Cédric Tiberghien, Piano

Princeton University Music Department

Richardson Auditorium, Alexander Hall

April 6 at 7:30 p.m.

Alina Ibragimova and Cédric Tiberghein officially started performing together in 2005 as members of the BBC Radio 3 New Generation Artists. According to the University music department’s event description, they “proceeded to … consistently top classical charts, receiving coveted awards for their recordings.” In this concert, they will perform “Schumann’s first two violin sonatas interspersed with the calm beauty of a work that Mendelssohn wrote when he was just 14 years old, and Webern’s pithy and lyrical early masterpiece.”

Ellipses Slam Poetry: !! soup !!

The Ellipses Slam Poetry

Class of 1970 Theatre, Whitman College

March 31 at 8:30 p.m. and April 1 at 6:30 p.m. and 8:30 p.m.

The Ellipses Slam Poetry performance is sure to be a thought-provoking option for your weekend plans. If you want to find out the meaning of “!! soup !!,” you can head to Ellipses’ performance on Friday or Saturday evening.

Ceramics Workshops

New College West Ceramics Studio

Various Times

If you are struck with the artistic spirit or would like to take your stress out on a hunk of clay, the recently opened New College West Ceramics Studio is offering workshops to learn various ceramics techniques, such as handbuilding and wheel throwing. These workshops are available throughout the week, and you can peruse the offerings and sign up on My PrincetonU.

Maruichi Japanese Food and Deli, 136 Nassau Street

Treat yourself to this Japanese food market and deli which recently opened on Nassau Street. With a large variety of prepared food, packaged items, and even skin and hair care, a visit to Maruichi will be an interesting, new experience to break up your week.

Hum r

First-year ‘totally fine and super okay’ that all of her friends are rooming without her

By Sophia Varughese & Aasha Jain Associate Humor Editor & Humor Contributor

The following content is purely satirical and entirely fictional.

In the Princeton community, the weeks spanning midFebruary to mid-March mark an important, exciting time for all: room draw. This annual event gives students the opportunity to solidify their friendships and pick the place they will live for the year, as long as they can do it within a threeminute window. However, one student seems to be having a particularly rough time during this year’s draw.

“I’m totally fine and super okay with the fact that all my friends are rooming together without me. I’m, like, super happy for them,” said Kass Taside ’26, as she opened her 12th tab of floor plans showing halls containing singles with bathrooms, most of which will be gone in the first half hour.

Taside told The Daily PrintsAnything about her “super chill” room draw process. “I was kinda confused when I filled out an application with all seven of their names listed and nobody accepted it. Now, I get it,” Taside said. “It really wasn’t embarrassing at all when draw times came out, and I saw that they were on the top half of the first page, and I was one of

three people on the last page. It was probably, like, the least embarrassing thing I’ve ever experienced, actually. All I did was punch a wall a few times. I literally wasn’t even that mad.” According to multiple sources, a girl said to look very much like Taside has been spotted multiple times sobbing on the SPIA steps. She was seen shrieking at passersby, begging them for a spot in their room draw group.

“I don’t know what’s happening to Kass,” said Bea Wilderd ’26, who says she knows her

from Writing Seminar. “She’s usually really calm and sweet. She said that since room draw started, her blood pressure has gone up to 180/110. I told her she was having a hypertensive crisis, and she told me to shut the f*ck up.”

“Bea told you that? Yeah, I asked to be in her group and she said it was full,” Taside said, mid-hyperventilation. “I don’t even care. Definitely a trash roommate. I promise you that girl doesn’t shower and farts in her sleep. I can promise you that.”

Aasha Jain is a contributing Humor writer who would rather live in a double with her dog than go through this whole room draw process. She reasons that her dog is tidy, respects boundaries, and most importantly, cannot reject her room draw advances.

Sophia Varughese is an associate Humor editor who swears on her mother’s life that she wants a single because she needs her own space, not because she doesn’t have friends. It is a coincidence that she doesn’t have friends.

Princeton to convert Firestone Library to basketball facility

By Rosie Eden Humor Contributor

The following content is purely satirical and entirely fictional.

Following the recent successes of both Princeton men’s and women’s basketball teams, the administration has begun to embrace the University’s clear-cut destiny as a basketball powerhouse. As a result, Firestone Library will be converted into a 24/7 basketball facility. New blueprints reveal plans to replace the stacks with bleachers and to turn Special Collections into climate-controlled locker rooms.

Many students are concerned about the new changes. “I find the sneaker squeaks to be distracting while I try to study,” Nada Baller ’24 said.

Others, however, are embracing the University’s new direction. “I like these changes,” Allie Oop ’25 said. “My problem sets are now a slam dunk!”

To keep the University’s new facilities occupied by NBA-bound talent, the Admission Office has announced new policies for next year’s admissions cycle.

Admissions will be implementing a new “test-optional” program, where, instead of submitting SAT scores and GPAs, applicants can opt into self-reporting their three-point shooting percentages and rebound stats.

Alumni interviews will be replaced with direct one-onone matchups. The Admissions Office did not respond to a request for comment from The DailyPrintsAnything about the possibility of offering ath-

letic scholarships to studentathletes in the future.

Rosie Eden is a contributing Humor writer and Arizonan who has eternal bragging rights over her friends at home.

CANDACE DO / THE DAILY PRINCETONIAN

Midnight strikes on men’s basketball’s Cinderella run in 86–75 loss to Creighton

By Wilson Conn Head Sports Editor

LOUISVILLE, Ky. — With under a minute left in Friday night’s Sweet 16 matchup, men’s basketball senior guard Ryan Langborg banked in a deep three-pointer from the top of the key, to raucous applause from the swaths of orange gathered in the KFC Yum! Center.

The shot gave Langborg, who has often been the hero of this year’s March Madness run, a career-high of 26 points. But this time, his basket was too little, too late, cutting the deficit to just eight, a gap that would prove insurmountable in the 15th-seeded Tigers’ (23–9 overall, 10–4 Ivy League) eventual 86–75 loss to sixth-seeded Creighton (23–12, 14–6 Big East).

From the start, Princeton struggled to contain Creighton’s offense. Within the first six minutes of the game, the Bluejays scored 17 points. Key to their hot start was guard Baylor Scheierman, who scored eight of their first 12 and finished with 21 points, shooting 73 percent from the field and hitting five of his seven three-point attempts.

Although the high-flying pace of the game was not to Princeton’s advantage, the Tigers kept up throughout the first half. A midhalf 9–2 run, which included a rare three-pointer from senior forward Tosan Evbuomwan and a pair of trademarked Princeton backdoor cuts, erased an eight-point Creighton advantage, at a juncture when it had seemed that the Bluejays were ready to break the game wide open. And with just under six minutes left in the half, a three-pointer from Langborg gave the Tigers a 34–33 lead.

“[Langborg] deserves a lot more, I think, from the Ivy League, in terms of recognition,” Evbuomwan said after the game, referencing the fact that Langborg did not receive any conference honors. “But it clearly doesn't mean anything to him … he has played the last few weeks and just put us on his back. He has been unbelievable.”

“He has just been terrific,” head coach Mitch Henderson ’98 added.

“His confidence level rose throughout the [NCAA] Tournament, and so did ours.”

After a three-pointer from sophomore guard Blake Peters gave Princeton their largest lead of the game, 37–33, the Bluejays flew back into the lead, going on a 12–1 run to give themselves a seven-point advantage. The Tigers once again bounced back, though, as a Peters triple and an Evbuomwan layup would bring the score to 47–43, Creighton, at the half. The English forward finished the first frame with 15 points, four rebounds, and six assists.

Despite Evbuomwan’s impressive first-half numbers, and just three Tiger turnovers, Princeton entered the locker room with a number of glaring issues. Principal among these was their inability to provide any resistance to Creighton’s offense, which was shooting a scalding 62.1 percent from the field and making half of their threepoint attempts. To make matters worse, the Tigers, who entered 11th in the nation in rebounding margin, were losing the battle on the glass, 16–14.

“I thought the last four minutes of the first half was crucial, swinging their way, and we couldn't get back into the game,” Henderson said.

Although Princeton stuck around for much of the second half, the struggles both defending and rebounding meant Creighton remained in control down the stretch; for the game, Princeton was out-rebounded 37–26, and the Bluejays ended up shooting 58.2 percent from the field. Creighton opened the second half on a 21–9 run, and the undersized Tigers continued to struggle with the length of the Creighton players inside, uncharacteristically losing battles for loose balls and seeing their shots authoritatively denied at the rim.

“They're really well-coached,” Henderson noted. “They know exactly what they are, and they're very well-oiled, as we had expected.”

“We got ten more shots than they did,” he added. “We just couldn't stop them.”

A switch to a 1–3–1 zone defense somewhat dampened the Bluejay attack, as they shot just 53.8 percent from the field in the second half, but the combination of Scheierman and First Team All-Big East forward Ryan Kalkbrenner — who finished with 21 points on 75 percent shooting — remained potent.

“We had seen great size and length against Arizona, but we [hadn’t] seen Kalkbrenner's agility and speed,” Henderson said. “I thought he was the key. They just got easy baskets when they needed them.”

Of course, to hold any lead in March, a team also needs a bit of luck. In Princeton’s second-round win over Missouri, their good fortune was the hot shooting of Peters, as he scored 17 points in the game’s final 11 minutes. However, Lady Luck seemed to have sided with Creighton on Friday night. As a pair of second-half Peters three-pointers rimmed out, Scheierman banked in a triple of his own, extending the Bluejays’ lead. After the 18-minute mark of the second half, this lead dropped below eight just once, on a pair of Tosan Evbuomwan free throws with under four minutes remaining. A string of fouls extended the game late for Princeton, but the valiant efforts of Evbuomwan (24 points, six rebounds, nine assists) and Lang-

borg (who scored more than half of his squad’s second-half points) were not enough. The Tigers were forced into submission before the final buzzer, emptying the bench as the senior stars left the court for the final time in Orange and Black.

“We fought all the way to the end, but came up short,” Henderson said. “That does not define us one bit.”

After the game, the thousands of Tiger fans who made the trip to Kentucky didn’t filter out of the arena, treating the team to a standing ovation befitting their historic run. The Princeton faithful — alumni, students, and locals alike — were out in force all tournament long, filling both the Golden 1 Center in Sacramento, Ca. last weekend and the KFC Yum! Center Friday night with rapturous cheers.

“We wouldn't be here without the fans, without the alums, everybody that's come to support us,” Langborg said. “Every time we hit a couple of shots, they're going nuts, and it gives us all the confidence in the world. I'm very thankful for everyone who is supporting us.”

With this year’s tournament characterized, as is usual, by its unpredictability — being the first where not a single one-seed team qualified for the Elite Eight — Princeton was among the most unforeseeable stories of them all. The

Tigers were just the 11th 15-seed to ever win a game in March Madness, and were just the fourth to ever win two. And for the first time in modern tournament history, Princeton qualified for the Sweet 16.

“I think it just shows that there's not a lot that separates us from everyone else,” Langborg said. “[If] you have a tough group who [are] bonded and the best of friends, [and if] you play with joy, anything can happen.”

“These guys have done something that no one has ever done,” Henderson added. “I know that there [were] some really great Princeton teams in the past, but this is a really, really special team.”

Even though the team and its fans will undoubtedly wonder what could have been had the squad continued their run, making it this far in the tournament remains a historic accomplishment. And although the Tigers won’t end up lifting the trophy in Houston next week, the fact still remains: Cinderella is a Jersey girl.

“I'm so proud of them,” Henderson said. “The school is so proud of them.”

“You look at this as such a successful year. It's such a year of joy for our program.”

Wilson Conn is a head editor for the Sports section at the 'Prince.'

USG should support its student-athletes and fans

The following is a guest contribution and reflects the author’s views alone.

“AFTER 27 YEARS:

DAVID 59, GOLIATH 55,” read the ‘Prince’ headline following Princeton’s shocking victory against Arizona last Thursday. The last time Princeton was in the last sixteen of the NCAA men’s basketball tournament was 56 years ago, when the team was coached by Butch van Breda Kolff ‘45. Put simply, Princeton students and fans don’t have an opportunity to cheer sports teams on a national stage very often.

The NCAA basketball tournament, known colloquially as “March Madness,” is a unique, exciting display of the best of college sports. Unlike other college tournaments, such as the College Football Playoff, March Madness is inclusive to all Division I schools, with the winner of every conference receiving an automatic bid, leaving an environment fertile for upsets and “Cinderella stories” like those of St. Peter’s, UMBC, and Florida Gulf Coast University in recent years.

Ivy League teams are no

strangers to major upsets in the past. Pete Carril’s backdoor plays defeated the mighty UCLA Bruins in 1996, the Harvard women completed the first 16-1 upset in tournament history over Stanford in 1998, and a ferocious Yale defense outrebounded the Baylor Bears in 2016. Despite the history of upsets, in the past 45 years, an Ivy League team has only reached the Sweet 16 three times: 1979, 2010, and now. This is a historic moment for both Princeton and the Ivy League as a whole. Thus, it is incumbent upon Princeton’s leadership to ensure students can witness school history.

At the Undergraduate Student Government (USG) meeting last Sunday, student leaders discussed the potential of bringing Princeton students to Louisville to cheer on the Tigers. In discussing USG’s overall budget, President Stephen Daniels ’24 claimed the total cost to bring students to the game would be around $20,000, a third of the $60,000 unallocated USG budget. While a trip for students to Louisville would be “cool,” as Social Chair Avi Attar ’25 described it, USG eventually decided to spend the money on campus-related programming.

Allocating money towards “school spirit on

campus,” while still helpful to students, is not the best use of the funds. With the spread of Pay with Points, Princeton students have the opportunity like never before to engage with restaurants and shops on Nassau Street and beyond campus in the town of Princeton. Thus, there remains little incentive for students to participate in programming such as Tigers in Town when they’re afforded similar opportunities through Pay with Points.

On the other hand, attending live games provides students with a sense of school spirit that is difficult to replicate through other activities. When students attend games together, they develop a sense of camaraderie and community that is vital to campus culture. The excitement of a live game is contagious and can create lasting memories that students will cherish for years to come. As much as we hope our recent success continues, we may not have another chance to see Princeton in the Sweet 16 soon.

In addition, USG hasn’t been afraid to spend large amounts of money for events not directly on-campus in the past. In the fall of 2020, USG notoriously spent $80,000 to have Jason Derulo give a Zoom Lawn -

parties concert. While one could argue that Zoom and Princeton’s campus were synonymous in 2020, we would argue a mass gathering of Princeton students in Louisville consists of far more of a “campus environment” than thousands of individuals on screens at home.

During the Fall 2022 semester, the Classes of ’24, ’25, and ’26 Student Governments allocated funding for a bus headed towards Yale, allowing students to watch the Princeton football team play to potentially clinch the bonfire. Student interest in an Ivy League regular season game was evident, so USG delivered on their constituents' desire. Now, Princeton is playing in a basketball game on the national scale, but there is no assistance to help students make the 700-mile journey to Louisville — an expensive flight or arduous drive for college students. With the unique opportunity of Friday’s Sweet 16 matchup, USG is balking at spending the necessary funds.

A vibrant student section on a national stage increases the public perception of Princeton’s student body as caring about athletics.

Princeton students can be — and are — passionate about both academics and the success of our athletic

teams, and a strong presence in Louisville would enable us to show it. While Princeton was ridiculed on social media for having a student body apathetic towards sports, having strong support in a nationally televised, prime-time game has the power to change that narrative, showcasing the strength of Princeton’s fanbase to millions of viewers.

Sending students to the Sweet 16 game is an opportunity 56 years in the making — it would allow Princeton’s student body to showcase our support for athletics and increase school spirit. By sending students to the game, the USG would be investing in the school's culture while building stronger relationships between students. Although we’re still dancing into the second weekend of the NCAA Tournament, we should be sure to celebrate and support the basketball team to the fullest extent before it’s too late.

Jacob Davis is a first-year from New York, NY. He can be reached at jd3728@princeton. edu.

Max Hines is a sophomore from Pound Ridge, NY. He can be reached at mhines@princeton.edu.

Jacob Davis & Max Hines guest contributors

Ryan Langborg: from state champion to Cinderella story

By Hayk Yengibaryan Assistant Sports Editor

Golden 1 Center has been pretty good to men’s basketball senior guard Ryan Langborg .

In 2019, as a senior at La Jolla Country Day High School (La Jolla, Ca.), he scored 23 points while registering 17 rebounds and six assists en route to a California Division III state title over San Francisco University High School (San Francisco, Ca.) and game MVP honors.

Fast-forward four years, and Langborg has found success in Sacramento once again; this time, as a member of the Princeton men’s basketball team. Last weekend, the Tigers recorded two upset wins in Golden 1 Center over Arizona and Missouri, en route to the school’s first Sweet 16 appearance of the modern tournament era.

“At the time, the state championship was one of the coolest moments of my life,” Langborg told The Daily Princetonian. “It was great to go back there and have repeat success. I’ll always have great memories of Sacramento and that gym.”

Langborg has been instrumental in the Tigers’s historic Sweet 16 run. He played 32 minutes against Arizona, helping shut down the Wildcats guard Courtney Ramey and scoring the go-ahead basket with just over two minutes to play.

Against Missouri, Langborg picked up where he left off with his heroics at the end of the Arizona game, leading the Tigers in scoring and hitting a number of deep three-point baskets. He finished the game with 22 points, six rebounds, and four assists.

“I felt good in warmups, and tried to be as aggressive as I could,” Langborg said. “The

ball was going in and my teammates set me up really well.”

This year’s tournament success is the culmination of a lifelong love of basketball for Langborg.

“I’ve been playing basketball since before I knew what it was. I used to put a ball through my parents arm on planes,” he said. “I fell in love with the competition and grew up a big Richard Hamilton fan.”

Later in his childhood, Ryan had one of the best high school careers one could imagine. He was a four-year starter at La Jolla Country Day, winning not only the state championship his senior year, but also the 2016 San Diego CIF Championship his first year.

He holds the school record with 2,456 points scored in his career, and the single-game record with 42 points. He ranks eighth all-time in San Diego CIF Section history and was the 2019 California Division III State Player of the Year. Langborg committed to Princeton in the summer after his junior year.

The Ivy League is in Langborg’s bloodline. His father, Kurt swam at Yale, and told him from a young age that “at some point, the ball is going to stop bouncing,” and that he must be prepared for life after. Langborg said this is the reason why he chose to play at Princeton, where both academics and athletics are valued.

“This school has given me so much. It’s made me grow up in such a short period of time,” he said. “It’s not only about athletics, it’s about academics as well, and this is a place where I can get the best of both worlds.”

“We believe we’ve shown this year that you can play at an Ivy League school and still be competing with the top basketball schools in the country,

whilst coming out with a great degree at the end,” he added.

During his first year with the Tigers, Langborg saw action and was an impactful player from the beginning. He featured in 20 contests, starting nine of them, with his season-high in points coming in a defeat to Big Ten powerhouse Indiana.

Unfortunately for the Tigers, the Ivy League canceled the entire 2020–21 athletic season due to the COVID-19 pandemic. This was a major decision, considering the fact that most other conferences were going ahead with their season.

“Covid was hard on all of us,” he said. “Watching other universities play while the Ivy League sat out definitely fueled my fire.”

“It made us all appreciate the game, appreciate being together, [which is] something that we can’t take for granted. [This] translates to our play on the court.”

Coming out of the canceled

season, Langborg was a big contributor to the squad in the 2021–22 year. He finished the season ranked third in the Ivy League in three point percentage (40.5 percent) whilst averaging 2.3 made three-point shots made per game.

Langborg’s senior season has arguably been his best yet. He has featured and started in all 31 games, averaging 12.3 points. However, prior to the NCAA tournament, Langborg was “snubbed” from the AllIvy teams. “I don’t need the individual accolades,” Langborg said. “I’d rather the team succeed and I’m proud of the guys, [senior forward Tosan Evbuomwan and junior guard Matt Allocco] they deserved it”.

Langborg has undoubtedly proved his deservingness of an All-Ivy spot with his tournament play, which has also recently earned him a bit of celebrity online. After the big win against Missouri, Langborg was trending on social

media due to his LinkedIn profile. Last summer, he interned as an acquisition analyst at a commercial real estate company in San Diego.

“I’ve had 500 to 600 LinkedIn requests this past week,” Langborg said jokingly. “A guy on TikTok said, ‘You just lost to an acquisition analyst.’ It’s all just jokes and fun.”

Right now, Langborg is uncertain whether he will pursue real estate or professional basketball after graduating in May. For now, he is focused on enjoying the team’s March Madness.

“We’re just overjoyed with the opportunity, but also trying to be as tough as we can on the court,” Langborg said.

“It’s a great feeling to have the whole university behind us.”

Hayk Yengibaryan is an assistant editor for the Sports section at the 'Prince.'

Processing March Madness? This 2020 study from Princeton PNI could help

By Amy Ciceu Senior News Writer

This week, the Princeton men’s basketball team returns from a historic March Madness run, losing to Creighton in their first Sweet 16 appearance since the tournament expanded to 64 teams in 1985.

The team pulled off two upsets to get there, a source of major surprise for many devoted watchers. James Antony, a C.V. Starr Fellow at the Princeton Neuroscience Institute (PNI), has been studying this very phenomenon: the unpredictability of basketball games.

On Nov. 29, 2020, Antony and other researchers at the University published a paper showing that the human experience of witnessing basketball games that defy our expectations corresponds to unique neural, behavioral, and physiological markers.

As the University community continues to celebrate the Tigers’ early victories and process their ultimate loss, these findings shed light on how the brain behaves.

The study revolved around observations of 20 self-identified basketball fans as they witnessed the final minutes of nine games from the 2012 March Madness tournament. While watching these games unfold at pivotal moments, subjects’ eye movements and pupil dilation were monitored using specialized cameras. Their brain activity was

also tracked with functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI).

The study was based on a hypothesis termed Event Segmentation Theory (EST), which argues that humans segment their continuous experiences into internal event models that are used to predict future events.

“Although we experience the world continuously, we tend to divide it up into distinct events when we think back in memory,” Antony explained in a written statement to The Daily Princetonian. “So, what determines when we segment events, and how is this predicted by brain and eye patterns?”

According to Antony, the study found that more surprising plays “increased the likelihood that participants segmented events.” These unexpected outcomes also manifest as a variety of physiological changes and neural cues.

“In the eyes, greater surprise increased pupil dilation,” he wrote. “[I]n the brain ... greater surprise resulted in greater changes in neural event patterns — as if our brains more strongly updated their internal frame of mind when the context of the game shifted.”

Overall, the study’s results favored the EST theory, including findings of internal event segmentations, enhanced pupil dilation, and an increased probability of neu-

ral representational shifts in response to subjective assessments of surprise events that occurred in the basketball games subjects watched.

Most notably, the study found that “belief-inconsistent surprise” — defined as surprises that contradict one’s beliefs and introduce greater levels of uncertainty — served as a far more reliable indicator of subjective event boundaries than “belief-constant surprises” or surprises that align with one’s preferences and minimize uncertainty.

“We found that not all forms of surprise are created equal,” wrote Antony. Generally, he reported, surprises that were perceived to influ-

ence the final outcome of the game (moving win probability closer to 50 percent than 100 percent for the team currently winning) increased observed differences in brain patterns.

Based on the insights of Antony’s study, in the context of the Princeton men’s basketball team’s unforeseen winning streak, it would be predicted that most spectators watching these games would experience greater segmentation in subjective event models, increased pupil dilation, greater reward system activation, and pronounced neural state changes in higher-order cortical regions like the precuneus and medial prefrontal cortex.

However, Antony stressed that this interpretation holds true only for basketball fans who doubted the Tigers’ ability to trounce their opponents.

“For most fans around the [United States], we would predict each of those things. But for true Princeton fans who expected them to win all along, their surprise as Princeton pulled ahead might be much lower!” wrote Antony.

The original study was published in the journal Neuron on January 20, 2021.

Amy Ciceu is a senior News writer who covers research and COVID-19-related developments.

NATHAN GAGE / THE DAILY PRINCETONIAN

Senior guard Ryan Langborg handles the ball against Yale in the 2023 Ivy Madness final.

Sweet Sixteen

‘Princeton comes together when there’s a special moment’: Enthusiasm soars as March Madness watch parties reach capacity

By Olivia Sanchez & Lia Opperman Staff News Writer &Associate News Editor

Across campus and throughout the town of Princeton, normal activities paused as watch parties boomed in anticipation of Friday’s historic Sweet 16 match-up between the Princeton Tigers and the Creighton Bluejays.

The official Undergraduate Student Government (USG) watch party took place in the Whig Hall Senate Chamber, a room with a capacity of 280. Whig Hall, along with local bars Alchemist & Barrister and Winberie’s Restaurant & Bar, reached capacity before the game tip-off at about 9:30 p.m.

“I do wish we could go watch the game,” Marissa Michaels ’22 told The Daily Princetonian late Friday night. Whig Hall was her second stop after visiting a bar in town. “That was too crowded, and now this is too crowded,” she said.

Michaels is an associate news editor emeritus for the ‘Prince.’

The only place that graduate student Nate Dow and his friends could find a seat was outside of Alchemist & Barrister. On the windows of the bar, multiple signs read “Currently at full capacity. Please do not enter” by 8:30 p.m.

“Everybody loves an underdog,” Dow told the ‘Prince’ before the game. “It’s been a good story so far, so hoping we can keep it going, and they’ve got a chance. They’ve taken down tougher teams than Creighton.”

Whig’s exterior was illuminated in orange in celebration of the event. The party started at 7:30 p.m. with a poster-making station and other activities. USG representa-

tives, including President Stephen Daniels ’24, distributed temporary tattoos, stickers, and tiger ears in Oakes Lounge. Chicken fingers, mozzarella sticks, and waffle fries were served in the Senate Chamber, and both the Chamber and Oakes Lounge were decorated with orange and black balloons and posters of the players.

By 9 p.m., Whig had reached capacity and many people could not get seats, but students refused to let that dampen the mood. When asked how she felt about the event, Michelle Thurber ’26 shouted “I’m so excited!”, and when a cameraman told the crowd they were on national news, cheers erupted. Students stood on chairs and tables, and some watched from the balcony one floor above.

Michaels expressed that she feels Princeton often lacks school spirit when it comes to sports.

“It’s a shame that for sports, our school spirit only seems to get to really high levels when we’re at a really high national level of sports, and we don’t seem to have the same showing of school spirit when we’re competing on our typical level, which is also really high,” she added.

McCosh Hall 10, the room designated for overflow with a capacity of 350, was less crowded than Whig Hall, but the enthusiasm was palpable. Two high school seniors, Jayden Hill and Kyler Zhou from Princeton Day School, were in McCosh to watch the game. Hill stated, “This is a really, really close game … I’m on my toes right now.”

When asked how he was feeling, Zhou said, “Proud and excited, and a little anxious too.”

Both students claimed to be members of the Princeton Class of

2027, and Hill said he was recruited for football. The ‘Prince’ could not independently verify that they were admitted to Princeton. Princeton Day School does not have a football team.

By 9 p.m., Winberie’s had also reached capacity, according to a fire marshall inside the building. Graduate student Matt Mleczko told the ‘Prince’, “[Winberie’s] is probably my favorite atmosphere to watch a game like this. I’m really just here to watch to enjoy.”

Operations Research and Financial Engineering (ORFE) professor Alain L. Kornhauser GS’ 71 expressed his excitement for the game to the ‘Prince’ inside Winberie’s.

“If San Diego can beat Alabama, we can beat Creighton,” he said. “It’s been a long time since the Sweet

Sixteen. I’m just happy for the kids.”

“I’m glad they came back here and worked on their thesis,” he added.

Following the loss, David Shao ’26 expressed his disappointment. “We did so well for the first half … I feel like it was an 11-point curse, we were always 11 points behind in the second half.” He added, “We did so well … we advanced this far into the tournament. I think that they should come back being very proud of themselves.”

In addition to local watch parties, some Princeton students and alumni even traveled to Louisville, Ky. for the game.

Mike Nixon ’00 was in Sacramento to watch Princeton play its initial March Madness games last weekend, and he said he had “no doubt”

that he was going to Louisville for Friday’s game. “There wasn’t even an iota of hesitation,” he told the ‘Prince.’

“I love basketball, but this is special,” he added. “Princeton comes together when there is a special moment.”

Madeleine (Peake) Brase ’16 also made the trek to Louisville from Minnesota for the game.

“It’s amazing to see the support here and the alumni that have come tonight,” she said.

Olivia Sanchez is a staff news writer for the ‘Prince.’

Lia Opperman is an associate news editor for the ‘Prince.’ Associate News Editor Tess Weinreich contributed reporting.

ANGEL KUO / THE DAILY PRINCETONIAN

‘The team around the team’: How Princeton Band and cheer made it a March Madness to remember

By Gia Musselwhite & Yousif Mohamed Assistant Features Editor & Sports Contributor

Bright orange pom poms and plaid blazers stood out amidst the March Madness crowds as the traditional fight song, ‘The Princeton Cannon,’ blared into the night.

On the evening of March 24, Princeton alumni fans and spectators gathered in the sold-out KFC Yum! Center in Louisville, Ky. to see men’s basketball play in the third round of the NCAA Tournament.

“There were thousands of people in orange shirts at [the March Madness games]. Our job is to make sure that everybody hears those people and that those people are cohesively cheering for our team,” said Claudia Ralph, head coach of the Princeton University Cheerleading team.

After a season of bringing stunts and spirit to games, the cheer team had accompanied the No. 15-seed men’s basketball team to Sacramento, Ca. the week before to the first and second round of March Madness. Meanwhile, the Princeton University Band (PUB) traveled with the No. 10-seed women’s basketball team to Salt Lake City, Utah. Together, according to Ralph, these student groups made up “the team around the team.”

Last year, both the cheer team and band traveled with the women’s basketball team to the first two rounds of the NCAA tournament in Bloomington, Ind. The men’s team did not make it to the NCAA tournament in 2022. But the presence and success of both of Princeton’s basketball teams in this year’s March Madness came as a surprise to many, including Ralph.

“If anybody tells you that they thought [our men’s team] were going to be in the Sweet 16, they’re lying to you,” she said. She added that because the Ivy League is generally a one-bid conference for both the men’s and women’s tournaments, Athletics was “only prepar[ed] to field one team.”

Plans changed, however, when the men’s team won the Ivy Madness tournament on Selection Sunday, less than 24 hours after the women had captured a tournament title of their own. The tournament title meant both teams would be granted automatic bids to March Madness.

Later that day, the teams found out they’d be headed to two different cities on the opposite side of the country for first-round play; in just a few hours, the men would travel to Sacramento, Calif., while the women would be headed to Salt Lake City, Ut. Ralph said that the Athletics Department made the decision to send the cheerleaders with the men’s team to Sacramento and the band to Salt Lake City with the women’s squad at the beginning of that week.

Loud as can be: “Tiger, tiger, tiger!”

The cheer team only had a 10hour turnaround between being officially notified and setting off on their journey to Sacramento with the men’s team and their athletic support.

“I had to get everybody up. They had cheered at four basketball games [that weekend]... So uniforms were dirty, everybody was exhausted, [and] they wanted to go to bed,” said Ralph.

Instead of resting, the cheerleading team stayed up and packed for their trip to Sacramento.

Away games — especially at the NCAA tournament — come with their own sets of challenges. Ralph explained that compared to the “intimate venue” of Princeton’s Jadwin Gymnasium, the larger arenas where the team played combined with national media attention that became focused on Princeton’s “Cinderella story,” placed the cheerleaders in a different situation.

The Princeton student programs — cheer and band alike — are also smaller compared to those at many of the larger state universities Princeton competed against in the tournament, such as that of the University of Arizona, the Princeton men’s basketball first-round opponent. Ralph explained this meant fewer substitutes and alternates for the two groups, which was part of the reason band and cheer split up in the first two rounds.

Accordingly, the cheer team “had to do a lot of adapting this tournament,” said Tavarria Zeigler ’23, a senior captain. “Keeping that energy up has definitely been one of the main ways in which I’ve had to show up as captain.”

“It can be overwhelming,” added Jalynn Thompson ’24, another of the three captains of Princeton Cheerleading. “There’s a lot of responsibility with being such a frontward facing part of athletics.”

“As a leader, I [want us to] feel confident going out there and doing all of our stunts, being engaged, and putting on our best performance. I feel like we do make a difference, especially in our crowd, when we're helping to get defense chants going or keeping up the energy.”

The captains had the added task of making sure newer additions to the team, like first-year cheer member Stella Szostak ’26, felt comfortable and supported throughout the process.

Szostak said that if she would have heard she would be cheering for Princeton in the NCAA men’s basketball tournament a year ago, it would have “[blown] her mind.” Nonetheless, she highlighted that being a part of this journey has “built up a lot of pride [in her] for Princeton… to be involved in such an incredible, historic moment for the school.”

In addition to the larger arena, the two rounds played in Sacramento were also unique because they incorporated performances by the West Campus High School band,

local to Sacramento.

In place of PUB, which was busy playing over in Salt Lake City, the West Campus High School band played at the first two rounds in Sacramento, donning orange t-shirts to make their allegiance clear. The high school “rental” band, as Ralph called them, even learned ‘The Princeton Cannon,’ the University’s fight song, for the games.

“That’s a great way to start off, especially when you’re away from home… to start off with something that is a reminder of Princeton pride,” said Ralph.

Still, the cheerleading team looked forward to rejoining Princeton’s own band, who they have been partnering with at virtually all of the same sporting events since August.

“Having our Princeton band, and their plaid, definitely makes a huge difference,” said Zeigler.

Bringing the music

For members of PUB, their March Madness experience was similarly significant: “Just knowing you’re a part of the experience for the team and the fans is wild,” said Kate Voltz ’26, a ‘Drillmaster,’ or section leader in the band.

“You’re on a plane with [women’s basketball junior guard] Kaitlyn Chen and you’re like: ‘that’s just another student, but also this amazing athlete,’” Voltz added.

Told to go with the women’s team, the band flew to Salt Lake City, Utah, for the first two rounds of the NCAA women’s tournament over spring break. Women’s basketball ultimately fell in the second round to the University of Utah 63–56, despite putting up a brave fight for the second year in March Madness in a row.

The Band spiritedly played historic pieces of Princeton repertoire such as ‘The Princeton Cannon’ and ‘Old Nassau,’ as well as well-known mainstream tunes like ‘Mr. Brightside’ and ‘Summertime Sadness.’

“We really just showed up for our team in a way that we felt was really supportive,” said Natasha Hurwitch ’24, the band’s current president. Showing up in uniform on a weekend or break to play at game after game can be a tall task, not to mention the countless hours of preparation throughout the week. In light of this hard work, some members of the Band felt they were finally given their due over the last month.

Hurwitch recalls seeing junior forward Ellie Mitchell look up at the band and celebrate them after the win against North Carolina State in Salt Lake City. “It just [gave us] that feeling of ‘we’re involved in their win,’ off the court, from a morale standpoint,” Hurwitch said

She added that the band missed the cheer team’s presence in Utah. While the cheer team in Sacramento could supplement their performance by hiring West Campus High School as an independent band, it is against NCAA rules to

hire an outside “spirit squad” at games, so there could be no new group of cheerleader.

Nonetheless, the band highlighted Princeton cheer’s honorary presence. According to Ariane Adcroft ’26, the team made their best attempt to remember the Princeton cheers and perform them during breaks and timeouts.

“[Cheer] is a different vibe to spirit than the band is,” Voltz explained. “Obviously, we can be a little bit louder, but I think people also pay attention to their vibe more, and the energy they bring. It’s also really cool to have fellow students also contributing to spirit.”

“In Utah, the crowds were a little bit smaller… [but] that’s kind of fun for us as a band, because we like doing a lot of chants and heckles,” said Adcroft. “[With a] a small crowd, those were more audible.”

It can be difficult as a band to be audible amidst the shouting of thousands of people, especially at a road game. But despite competing against the cheers of an away crowd of over 8,500 in the womens’ heartbreaking loss against Utah, the Band’s resolve never wavered. They continued to perform exuberantly, doing their best to provide a backdrop for a Princeton comeback.

“We do our best with our silly little cheers and our silly little songs, but then to feel that [gratification] in a little bit of recognition from the team … was just amazing,” said Hurwitch.

Reunited at the Sweet 16

After the women’s team’s loss in Salt Lake City, the Band and cheer team were reunited for a final show of spirit in Louisville for the men’s team’s Sweet 16 matchup against Creighton.

“It’s always nice having both groups together,” said Adcroft. “[We are] more than the sum of [our] parts.”

Szostak agreed, mentioning that it was rewarding to “see the two groups work together… with the end goal of creating spirit and supporting the [men’s basketball] team.”

Ralph noted that for the Sweet 16, the men’s basketball team, cheerleaders, and band faced the added challenge of arriving days later to Louisville than their counterparts from other schools, so that they would miss as little class time as possible.

“To be an athlete [with] the emphasis on school first is something that we take very seriously” she explained.

Members of both the cheer team and band fondly described the fanfare and packed stadium that met them as they took to the sidelines in Louisville, despite the 86–75 loss.

Adcroft said, “just walking into that stadium in Louisville [and] seeing everybody there” would stand out in her memories. “I don’t think I’ve ever been to a space with that many yelling people cheering and everything,” they added.

“The most special part for me was all of the alumni that came out to March Madness," said Zeigler. “I saw people that I cheered with [during] my freshman [and] sophomore year, all coming back together to celebrate… it was an incredible culmination of the past four years.”

Shlok Patel ’25 and Sarah Burbank ’25 are two Princeton undergraduates who made the 11-hour drive from campus to the KFC Yum! Center to support the men’s team.

“I was part of marching band in high school… For that reason, I really enjoyed the [Princeton] band,” Patel told the ‘Prince’ in a phone interview. “Oftentime [Princeton] band members were shown on the jumbotron, and they [were] always smiling and dancing. Even when we were up or down points, [that was] helpful to keep the morale going.”

Burbank, a Louisville native, also commented on the energy in the gym.

“It was really cool to see a bunch of Princetonians there,” she said. “Even when we were losing, everybody was still so excited to be there.” Burbank credited the cheerleaders, who she said “did a great job every time they went on the floor.”

Looking ahead to future seasons, both cheer and band leadership are hoping to remember this experience as a sign of what the programs are capable of accomplishing together.

“We’ve really started to interact more and be engaging with the crowd, which is something that we’ve lacked, especially when I first came on,” said Ralph. “We’ve just started to build a good rapport with our fans, and they can see that we’re all making a difference in the game.”

Hurwitch added that the band, which is entirely student-run in all matters from logistics to music, has taken pride in their strong turnout and high-energy performance this season. She says they will continue to “self-advocate” for themselves in terms of playing time and a seat at the table, even when facing off against bands with professional directors.

“That is special in an organization that is incredibly optional,” said Hurwitch. “To have that continued reassurance of student love and student care for the band blows my mind every time I think about it.”

In any case, both the Band and cheer teams will continue to be around to help keep the Tigers’ claws sharp during nail-biters and blowouts alike in seasons to come.

“We have this mantra — adapt and overcome — as part of our team spirit, and that’s what we’re going to keep doing,” said Thompson.

Gia Musselwhite is an assistant Features editor at the ‘Prince.’ Yousif Mohamed is a copy editor and contributor to the Sports section at the ‘Prince.’

Tosan Evbuomwan named to alltournament team in NCAA South Regional

By Diego Uribe Assistant Sports Editor

After leading the men’s basketball team on a historic run to the Sweet 16, senior forward Tosan Evbuomwan was named to the NCAA Tournament’s South Regional All-Tournament Team on Sunday.

Evbuomwan was the only Princeton player to earn the honor of being named to the team and the only player not from San Diego State or Creighton. In three NCAA Tournament games, he averaged 16.0 points, 6.0 assists, and 7.3 rebounds. He led the Tigers in assists in two of their three games and led them in scoring in their Round of 64 win over the Arizona Wildcats with 15 points.

In their Sweet 16 loss to the Creighton Bluejays, Evbuomwan combined with fellow senior, guard Ryan Langborg for 50 of the team’s 75 points. Evbuomwan finished with 24 and nine assists, and Langborg finished

with 26 points, a career-high for the Tigers guard.

Langborg was notably left off the All-Tournament Team, despite leading the Tigers in scoring with an 18.7 per-game average. Of the three guards who earned the honor, none had a higher tournament scoring average than Langborg.

“I think Langborg made a great case [to be named to the team] too. He was unbelievable for us,“ Evbuomwan wrote to The Daily Princetonian.

Despite not having played against a team from a Power-Five conference all year heading into the tournament, Evbuomwan proved he is a high-major talent against PAC-12 Champions Arizona, Missouri, and a Big East powerhouse, Creighton.

“[I’m] glad we were able to show we can hang with anybody and compete with those guys,“ Evbuomwan wrote.

“The talent level was raised obviously [compared to the Ivy League] but I felt good playing out there.”

After wrapping up a legendary Princeton career, Evbuomwan’s plans are not yet public. He has one year remaining of NCAA eligibility, which he could choose to use at another university as a grad transfer. Playing in the pros also remains a possibility for the Englishman; NBADraft.net currently projects Evbuomwan as a late second-round pick in the upcoming 2023 NBA draft.

““I’ll make an announcement on next year’s plans soon,” he told the ‘Prince.’

Henceforth, the story of Princeton basketball will be incomplete without mention of Evbuomwan and his contributions to the program. He ranks second all-time in program history in assists and 34th all-time in points, despite having missed his entire sophomore season due to COVID-19 cancellations and played just 14.3 minutes per game as a first-year.

In two years as an upperclass player, he won back-to-back Ivy League

regular season titles, one Ivy Madness title, one Ivy Madness Most Outstanding Player award, one Ivy League Player of the Year award, and was a two-time All-Ivy First Team selection.

“My teammates, friends, and

coaches, all have meant so much to me and contributed to my success on the court,” he wrote. “I have tttmade bonds for life.”

Diego Uribe is an assistant editor for the Sports section at the ‘Prince.’

OPINION

Reactions: Princeton’s run to the Sweet 16

By Mohan Setty-Charity,

Rashid Opinion Staff

Princeton’s men’s and women’s basketball teams were on fire this season. Both teams made the Ivy Madness playoffs, and the men’s team reached the Sweet 16 round of the NCAA tournament. The teams’ success sparked national press coverage, enthusiastic alumni engagement, and a surge of Princeton student pride. We asked our columnists for their Reactions on Princeton’s basketball success — the school spirit it has inspired and the issues it shines a light on.

Princeton pride should drive us to fight for change

By Mohan Setty-Charity, Senior Columnist

The journey and successes of Princeton’s men’s and women’s basketball teams this year brought about one of those rare bursts of tremendous Princeton pride. Students showed up to watch parties, wore black and orange, and posted about their school spirit on social media. This is a departure from how people usually interact with the University: on a day-to-day basis, I hear much more about people’s challenges and irritations with Princeton than their appreciation for the school. But our joy can coexist with our exhaustion and disappointment.

In fact, our pride in having the basketball teams representing us on a national stage should fuel our desire to change our University for the better. Sports have the power to connect us: we came together to cheer our team on, even those of us who didn’t know all the players and even those of us who don’t follow basketball. What were we cheering for? The team who was going to represent us, and represent the University. We were joyful because we care about our school, and want to see our players succeed. It is with the same passion that we should be critical: we should strive to build a school that we can be proud of, too. Princeton is not a perfect institution, but through a continued commitment to better our school, we can continue to be proud.

Mohan Setty-Charity is a junior in the economics department. He grew up in Amherst, Massachusetts, and can be reached at ms99@princeton.edu.

This isn’t ‘High School Musical’ — athletes can do many things

By Abigail Rabieh, Head Opinion Editor

“Ballers and Scholars” is the informal motto that a popular Princeton Instagram account, @ BarstoolPrinceton, has adopted to describe the men’s basketball team’s recent success. The national media has salivated over this merging of identities, too. The idea of star athletes also completing p-sets and theses has captivated the nation, and Princeton has capitalized on it. But gawking at ‘nerd-jocks,’ or more simply, the idea of intelligent athletes, does a disservice to the rest of the players in the March Madness tournament. It’s no secret that Princeton is an academically rigorous school, so I was surprised to see the nation’s seeming surprise over the fact that these athletes are also graduating with degrees; but so are most other players in the March Madness tournament.

We should not be capitalizing on a narrative that student-athletes here are much better than studentathletes at other schools — it’s downright shameful to see Princeton students deriding the academic qualifications or experiences of opposing athletes. Furthermore, Princeton athletes, just like Princeton students at large, are extremely impressive on and off the playing surface. Expressing surprise or pride in this fact only serves to continue a sophomoric narrative that one can’t be successful in athletics and academics in a way that you can be with dance, writing, entre-

preneurship, or any other endeavor that Princetonians undertake.

Abigail Rabieh is a prospective history major and sophomore from Cambridge, MA. She is the head Opinion editor at the ‘Prince’ and can be reached by email at arabieh@princeton.edu or on Twitter at @AbigailRabieh.

Basketball isn’t the only sport that should invigorate school spirit

By Prince Takano, Columnist

The unexpected victories and successes of the Princeton men’s basketball team in the NCAA playoffs sparked more school spirit than I’d ever seen before. While the basketball hype was certainly merited, there are other sports where Princeton athletes work just as hard but never receive the same amount of attention or support. This is a major opportunity: Princeton students should support other sports teams, too. After all, we are ranked the No. 13 athletic program among the 330 NCAA Division I schools in America. Basketball might be one of America’s most popular sports, but let’s not forget the importance of other sports and athletes representing our school on campus and beyond.

Prince Takano is a junior from Los Angeles majoring in politics. He can be reached via email at takano@princeton.edu.

Build a long-lasting culture of school pride through celebratory social media

By Christopher Lidard, Technology Columnist

Moments of pride like both basketball teams’ historic seasons are key to building school spirit, unity, and shared identity. For longlasting and meaningful impact, we need to leverage social media before, during, and after celebratory occasions — and for more than just sports teams.

People often curate their social media to display group affinity. In turn, this public pride encourages others to display their membership to the “in crowd” more prominently as well. When our sports teams experience big wins, we see a barrage of celebratory story posts. Perhaps this is partly to signal to our peers at Princeton that we are in touch with the moment, but it also seemed partially oriented at our friends at different schools — showing those unaware of the victory how great it is to be a Princeton student.

Flexing on the Yalies we know from high school is fine, but we can do better: if we used social media to celebrate our high-achieving classmates and student organizations more frequently, it would feel less like just jumping on the bandwagon when people do post in support.

The more people remain informed, tracking the success of Princetonians throughout their seasons and competitions, the more invested they will be in the success of the school as a whole.

This increased investment in social media presence will have a secondary benefit: it’ll shift Princeton students’ bonding over their shared experience online away from anonymous complaining towards appreciation for their classmates, celebration, and school pride. And it could help build a culture of positivity on social media — the white whale of the Internet.

Christopher Lidard is a sophomore from outside Baltimore, Md. A computer science concentrator and tech policy enthusiast, his columns focus on technology issues on campus and at large. He can be reached at clidard@ princeton.edu.

Princeton should’ve supported school spirit around our big basketball moment

By Julianna Lee, Columnist

halls as usual. But life should

not have been “normal” on Friday, or even the week leading up to it: Princeton’s basketball team was playing in the NCAA Sweet 16 for the first time since 1967. Last Friday’s game against Creighton was a big deal.

But what did Princeton do about it? Basically nothing. There were no pep rallies. The band didn’t parade around campus leading up to Friday. There were no celebratory festivals in conjunction with the wider town of Princeton. There were no organized efforts to send students to Louisville to watch the big game. The closest we came to school spirit was the watch party at Whig Hall. We enjoyed Whig hall decked out in Princeton’s colors, but the building was far too small to hold the number of students who turned out, and many were put in a lecture hall serving as the “overflow room.”

It is rare that Princeton as a whole comes together around shared success. This makes athletics incredibly important: they bring the campus together and build school spirit. When the administration failed to provide the Princeton community with enough opportunities to celebrate, students missed out on the community that could have been

built around the game. Princeton prides itself on its academic rigor, and we tend to spend our Friday afternoons in Firestone. But for one historic weekend, Princeton should have done everything it could do to build up hype.

Julianna Lee is a sophomore and prospective politics major from Demarest, N.J. She can be reached by email at yl34@princeton.edu.

Athletes and non-athletes should get the chance to know one another

By Aly Rashid, Contributing Columnist

This Friday, Princeton students displayed an unprecedented amount of school spirit, gathering in Whig Hall to watch the men’s basketball team give it their all in the Sweet 16. But how many Princeton students knew the athletes they were cheering on?

Chances are, most Princeton students have no personal connection with the team they so proudly gathered for because Princeton life often separates athletes and non-athletes. The separation begins during orientation. While the rest of the class

disembarks on their small group experiences, Fall varsity athletes stay behind to train. They may also miss opening zee group activities, widening the gap between athletes and the rest of the student body.

The burst of school pride and unity that March Madness has brought are truly great. But we should aim for this unity to last beyond the game, instead of going back to being “students” and “student-athletes” as if they were mutually exclusive categories.

Aly Rashid (he/him) is a prospective SPIA major in the Class of 2026 from Lahore, Pakistan. He serves as a contributing columnist and Associate Editor of the Newsletter for the ‘Prince.’ Outside of the ‘Prince,’ he is Deputy Captain of the Princeton Model UN Team and International Orientation leader at the Davis IC.

ANGEL KUO / THE DAILY PRINCETONIAN

Abigail Rabieh, Julianna Lee, Prince Takano, Christopher Lidard, and Aly

WOMEN'S SOFTBALL

Softball defeats Brown Bears 2–1 in three-game series

By Tony Owens Sports Contributor

This past weekend, softball (9–13 overall, 5–1 Ivy League) traveled to Providence, R.I. for a three-game series against the Brown Bears (4–13, 2–4), winning two of three. Princeton entered the series 3–0 in Ivy League play, having swept the Yale Bulldogs (8–14, 2–4) the week prior.

The Tigers began the series on Friday with a dominant pitching performance from senior pitcher Alexis Laudenslager in a 1–0 win. Laudenslager threw a no-hitter with an impressive ten strikeouts in seven innings of work.

“Alexis is the tone setter for our team and leads us to stay in games and allow us to win tight games,” senior left fielder Serena Starks wrote to The Daily Princetonian. “She has been consistent in the circle and will continue to play with composure and confidence.”

Offensively, the Tigers struggled, as Bears pitcher Alexis Guevara also went the full seven innings, holding the Tigers’ offense to just four hits. Two of those hits came in the fourth inning, where a lead-off single from Starks was followed by a triple from

MEN'S LACROSSE

first-year third baseman Julia Dumais, plating the only run of the game for either side.

“Winning the first game is always important, as it helps us gain momentum for the rest of the series,” said sophomore outfielder Allison Ha. Ha is a sports contributor at the ‘Prince.’

Two days later, the Tigers began the first game of the Sunday doubleheader, in which both teams started the game with the same pitchers as Friday. The star of this game was Brown’s right fielder Jasmine Hsiao.

The Bears got on the board first. Following a single from Brown second baseman Cameron Zytkewicz, Hsiao drove her in with an RBI double to center field. Hsiao would go on to hit a two-run homer in the fourth, again driving in Zytkewicz. This home run would mean the end of the outing for Laudenslager, who allowed three earned runs in 3.2 innings pitched.

Junior pitcher Molly Chambers entered in relief, finishing the fourth inning. After a scoreless fifth inning, a solo shot in the sixth from Hsiao extended the Bears’ lead to four. Hsiao’s two home runs and double accounted for all four of

Brown’s runs.

Offensively, the Tigers had no answer for Guevara in game two.

The sophomore held Princeton to just three hits, as she tossed a full seven innings again, this time surrendering no runs and striking out three in the process. This left the series split, with the decisive game coming later that afternoon.

“After losing the second game, we knew that we would have to come out firing for game three,” Ha wrote to the ‘Prince.’ “Knowing that we were a much better team than how we played in game 2, we just had to learn from our mistakes and take the little positives to fuel game 3.”

In game three, Princeton’s offense finally woke up. The Tigers matched their run total in the previous two games immediately with a first inning solo shot from Dumais. Brown would respond in their half of the first as Hsiao continued her strong weekend, reaching base on a walk before swiping second base and later scoring on a throwing error, evening the score at one run a piece.

The second inning saw Brown take a 2–1 lead as Zytkewicz scored on a sac fly from first-

year designated player Liv Kam. The score remained 2–1 in favor of the home side until the fourth, when a double from junior shortstop Grace Jackson scored first-year pinch runner Courtney Harrison from first base. From there, sophomore catcher Lauren Pappert singled to left, giving the Tigers their first lead of the match.

Heading into the seventh inning and looking for some insurance, the Tigers tacked on two more runs. Back-to-back doubles from junior first baseman Caitlin Bish and Dumais opened the scoring for the inning, before Ha reached on an error, scoring Dumais.

A strong combined ef-

fort on the mound from first-year pitcher Brielle Wright and sophomore pitcher Meghan Harrington held the Bears’ offense to two runs as the pair pitched 4.1 and 2.2 innings, respectively.

“Despite losing game two, all of us had full confidence in winning game three” said Ha. “The team is very good at picking each other up. And at the end of the day, we know we can beat anybody, and I always have faith in the team to pull out the win.”

Princeton left Rhode Island having won their first two series in Ivy League play. The Tigers will look to carry this momentum into a busy week featuring five

games between March 29 and April 2, including a two-game series against the Rider Broncos (6–14) and a threegame Ivy League series against the Penn Quakers (2–22, 0–6).

“We have not reached our peak Princeton softball yet. If we continue to stay the course and trust the process, our offense will ignite and score more runs,“ said Starks. “The team just has to continue putting good swings on the ball and learn from every at bat.”

Tony Owens is a contributor to the Sports section at the ‘Prince.’

No. 20 men’s lacrosse upsets No. 12 Yale for first Ivy League victory

By Harrison Blank Sports Contributor

On a cold rainy Saturday afternoon, No. 20 men’s lacrosse (3–4 overall, 1–1 Ivy League) upset No. 12 Yale (3–3, 0–2) in a 23–10 win, securing their first league victory of the season.

The game was the 108th all-time meeting between the two teams whose rivalry dates back to the 1880s. This game also marked a rematch of last year’s National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) quarterfinal matchup, which had also resulted in a Princeton win.

The Tigers came into Saturday’s game needing a season-altering win after back-to-back overtime losses to both Rutgers (7–2, 0–1 Big Ten) and Penn (3–4, 1–1) in their previous two games. Sophomore attack-

er Coulter Mackesy, was instrumental to the Tigers’ win, as he was involved in 10 of Princeton’s 23 goals, finishing with eight goals and two assists.

"Coming off two overtime losses against Rutgers and Penn is really hard," Mackesy said in a post-game interview on ESPN+. “We’ve learned a lot these past three weeks and it was great to win on our home field.”

Yale began the game with a face-off win and a goal by midfielder Jack Monfort after only a minute of play. The Tiger offense quickly received a chance to equal the score with a 30-second man-up opportunity, but unfortunately for the Tigers, they could not capitalize.

The ensuing minutes involved back-and-forth possessions by both

teams, with a couple of Princeton shots hitting off the goalposts and the Tiger defense forcing turnovers to keep the score 1–0 in favor of Yale.

Mackesy began his successful day by putting the Tigers on the scoreboard at 7:11 in the first quarter with his 20th goal of the season during a man-up possession, firing a lefthanded shot from the right side of the field.

By then, the Princeton offense had settled in, and the Tigers were ready to take the lead. After a faceoff win by sophomore Koby Ginder, who was filling in for the injured Tyler Sandoval, Mackesy added his second goal of the day barely a minute after his first.

Shots started to pour into the Yale goal, challenging Bulldog goalie

Jared Paquette. Mackesy’s dominant performance continued as an underhand shot gave him a first quarter hat-trick less than twelve minutes into the game.

Mackesy added his fourth goal on the Tigers’ third man-up opportunity of the first quarter, and Princeton entered the second quarter up 4—1. After surrendering an early goal, the Tiger defense stood strong for the next 14 minutes, forcing turnovers and errant shots.

Another goal from Mackesy, a goal from sophomore attacker Jack Ringhofer in his first career start, and senior midfielder Beau Pederson’s first goal of the season soon gave Princeton a 7—1 cushion. Yale momentarily closed to within five after a man-up goal by mid-

fielder Thomas Bragg and another goal from attacker Brady McDermott, but the Princeton offense refused to be quieted.

The Tigers ended the second quarter on a 4–0 run, highlighted by a coast-to-coast fast break goal from Pederson for his second of the game, and Mackesy scored his sixth of half. Junior attacker Lukas Stanat also added his second goal of the game and senior midfielder Alex Vardaro put his name on the box score with his first goal of the game.

The offensive explosion by the Tigers coupled with aggressive defense and stalwart goaltending from junior goalie Michael Gianforcaro gave Princeton a 12–3 lead entering halftime, as they searched for their first Ivy League win.

As rain poured down in the beginning of the third quarter, Yale scored two straight goals in an attempt to close the ninegoal gap, but senior midfielder Christian Ronda halted the Bulldog run, scoring his first goal of the night with eight minutes left in the third quarter.

Ginder continued showed the depth of the Princeton team with a face-off goal to give Princeton a 15–5 lead. The Tiger offense was firing on all cylinders, scoring three more in the quarter.

Even with a 18–7 lead to start the fourth quarter, the Tigers kept their starters on the field, trying to solidify a statement win.

The Princeton faithful stayed at Sherrerd Field to watch the historic offensive performance continue

against a bitter rival.

The Tigers and Bulldogs traded goals for the entirety of the fourth quarter, with a final score of 23–10. Sophomore midfielder Sean Cameron scored two for the Tigers, and senior attacker Weston Carpenter added another. Ronda also scored his fourth goal of the day in the offensive onslaught.

Early-season concerns that the Tiger offense was reliant on Mackesy for success were put to rest as the Tigers received help on the attacking end from a variety of players, with ten different goal scorers on the day.

It was the goal scoring that ruled the day for Princeton, as their 23 goals were the most all-time against Yale. Meanwhile, the physical defense from the Tigers kept Yale out of the game from the earlygoing.

Princeton continues their Ivy League schedule next week at home at Sherrerd Field against the Brown Bears (3–4, 0–1) who are coming off two consecutive one-point losses to Harvard in overtime and UMass Amherst.

The Tigers have several must-win games coming up if they want to make the Ivy League tournament and potentially the NCAA tournament, but Saturday’s win is a great start.

"To get back to 1–1 in league play is huge for us, it’s a big confidence booster," Macksey said.

COURTESY OF SHELLEY M. SZWAST/GOPRINCETONTIGERS

Senior pitcher Alexis Laudenslager threw a no-hitter with an impressive ten strikeouts in seven innings of work in the Friday opener.

Harrison Blank is a contributor to the Sports section at the ’Prince.’

COURTESY

Sophomore attacker Jack Ringhofer scored in his first career start against Yale.