Frances Walton ’26
Editor-in-Chief
Since Oct. 15, Pomona College has banned 15+ Scripps College students, citing their “presence during the events inside Carnegie Hall” following the Oct. 7 walkout for divestment in solidarity with Palestine. The ban letters, signed by Pomona College President G. Gabrielle Starr and emailed by Dean of Students Avis Hinkson, came as a shock to three banned Scripps students interviewed by The Scripps Voice, all of whom requested anonymity due to the uncertainty of further disciplinary sanctions.
“This campus ban prohibits you from entering any and all property of Pomona College … for any reason, 24 hours each day, and will be in effect for the remainder of the 2024-2025 academic year,” the email stated. “This prohibits you from participating in classes or any other activities in person.”
The ban letters leaked to TSV did not provide evidence of the students’ presence in Carnegie Hall nor detailed reasoning for the ban beyond their presence inside the building. Starr and Hinkson did not respond to TSV’s interview request.
“The most far-reaching violation of the individuals thus sanctioned by the College was their involvement in the takeover of a building, the forced end of classes and the disruption of our academic mission,” Starr wrote in an Oct. 23 email to Pomona community members. “This takeover created an environment that was fundamentally dangerous, restricting entrance and exit for Carnegie, and even leading to students leaving the building by the windows.”
The banned students interviewed felt that their presence inside Carnegie Hall was not egregiously disruptive, given that no member of the classes inside the building appeared visibly upset while leaving.
One banned student said the protest organizers “said that it wasn’t an occupation of the building, like we were just there.”
A Scripps student who witnessed the building takeover from outside said that the people in Carnegie Hall could leave, and all three banned students agreed they were never locked in the building.
“I saw multiple students leave their classes through the main entrance, and they were not blocked at all,” the student said. “They were completely free to leave and no one was talking to them, there was no issue at all. So there’s this crazy narrative that’s being spun that kids had to climb out of windows. They chose to do that.”
All three of the banned students remember being filmed at some point during the protest. The banned students speculated that Pomona College identified them based on videos from other students, professors, or news organizations.
“These people kept barging in [Carnegie] and trying to shove past people to record us,” a banned student said.
Given the reasoning for their bans, some found this speculated method of identification to be inappropriate and hypocritical.
“[Pomona] was like, ‘oh, your behavior was disrespectful, and people were afraid,’ a banned student said. “And, I put in my letter that people were afraid of me as a person of color — imagine how I felt right when people were coming in shoving cameras in my face. Hello, I wouldn’t do that to anyone. I think that’s a crazy violation of someone’s personal space, even if this was somebody that I vehemently disagreed with.”
Two of the three students remembered being filmed inside Carnegie. They felt that if Pomona College based their bans on presence inside the building, Pomona should hold the people recording to the same standards.
“Then [one recording student] submitted them to the Claremont newspaper, fully knowing that people would get doxxed, that their educations would be ruined, and she’s glad for it, and nothing will be taken against her,” the student witness said. “Like, damn, she was there too … She disrupted the building more. She was pushing past people. Not a single physical or like verbal confrontation was started by one of the protesters. Not a single one.”
The banned students took advantage of the option to appeal the ban given in the ban letter — some were quickly met with rejection.
“I received the ban notice last Tuesday, the last day of fall break right when I got back to Claremont,” a banned student said. “I immediately started working on an appeal letter. I sent that off Thursday afternoon, and then I found out on Friday night that it was rejected.”
Pomona College upheld the three students’ bans after their requests for appeal. In their letters, all three students detailed their peaceful involvement and emphasized that they were unaware of the vandalism.
“A large portion of my appeal letter was genuinely explaining my side of the story,” one banned student said. “I have no idea what evidence they have against me, and I know that folks have reached out and asked for [it] and they won’t give it. … I honestly didn’t know that [vandalism] occurred until I left. To me, that should have been evidence enough to appeal the ban … The response was that just by being there, I should be held responsible for what someone else did.”
Hinkson found the students in violation of The Claremont Colleges Demonstration Policy, which states, “If an officer or designee of an affected college or The Claremont Colleges Services informs individuals in a given area that their collective actions are judged non-peaceful or disruptive and that they should disperse, individuals remaining may be charged on their home campus with a violation of this policy.”
However, the banned students said they left Carnegie Hall before or immediately after 2:32 p.m. when Campus Safety emailed Scripps students requiring all occupants to leave. All three affirmed that no Campus Safety officer or school official told them to disperse until receiving the email.
“I have literal evidence that I was back in my dorm by 1:00 p.m.,” a banned student said. “It’s frustrating, and I understand that I made that choice, but it’s a disproportionate response.”
At the request of Scripps Associated Students President Melina Durre ’25, CARE@Scripps sent an email to all banned Scripps students “to offer support in brainstorming and preparing appeal letters, including discussing individual circumstances and how students can best present their perspectives in the appeal process,” according to an email to The Scripps Voice from Vice President of Student Affairs and Dean of Students Dr. Sha Bradley and Vice President of Academic Affairs and Dean of Faculty Dr. Mary Hatcher-Skeers, sent through the Office of Marketing and Communications.
Some banned students felt frustrated by the Scripps administration’s lack of advocacy for their students.
“Scripps was offering us help with our appeals, despite the fact that all the appeals are going to be rejected unless there’s evidence that you weren’t in the building,” a banned student said. “Like, okay, what’s the point? You know?”
Beyond help with appeals, students have yet to receive more information from Scripps about the possibility of disciplinary meetings or details about Scripps College administration’s role in the ban letters.
“There’s still potential for disciplinary action from Scripps itself, but they’re not giving us a timeline or what that would look like,” a banned student said. “The only thing that I’ve heard [through the grapevine] is that it’ll probably be less severe than Pomona, but that’s so scary to just be sitting here, waiting to hear from Scripps, and also having to be responsible for advocating for myself to my professor at Pomona. Who knows what their viewpoints are on anything, and it feels like no one really knows what’s going on.”
Another banned student shared a desire for more clarity.
“I just want the school to be honest with me,” the banned student said. “If I’m going to go through a conduct process, I’m okay with that. I’m owning up to the fact that I chose to go inside that building, but if I’m going to face consequences for it, and they kind of know what’s going to happen, because [Scripps students got banned] happened last spring, I would like someone to just tell me.”
Bradley could not confirm to TSV about the possibility of disciplinary action for banned Scripps students. A student who attended a meeting with a separate staff member from the Dean of Students office felt disappointed in the amount of information given to them.
The interviewed students had varied levels of academic participation at Pomona College, but they all felt frustrated at Scripps College’s lack of communication regarding their academic and disciplinary futures.
“Individual students will experience different academic challenges,” Bradley and Hatcher-Skeers wrote in the Marketing and Communications email. “We encourage students to reach out to the Dean of Faculty Office to discuss their specific circumstances.”
Regarding classes, Starr wrote that banned students could make arrangements with their Pomona professors, at their “sole discretion,” to continue coursework virtually during the ban.
With the upheld bans, the banned Scripps students enrolled in classes at Pomona College communicated with their professors and experienced varied levels of modification to their classes, with some taking classes on Zoom.
“That’s crazy that you’re now paying $90,000 to do your classes online, and your home college doesn’t even care enough to advocate that they shouldn’t have to do that,” a banned student said.
Bradley said that Pomona conducted the investigations and subsequent bans and that Scripps College was not involved.
“It would be inappropriate of Scripps to comment on Pomona’s [conduct policies],” Bradley and Hatcher-Skeers said in the Marketing and Communications email.
The banned students felt that Scripps should have advocated for them, especially in communication with Pomona.
“I don’t understand why their stance should be anything but: we want to protect our students who are remorseful and weren’t even involved in [vandalism],” a banned student said.
To all three students, the bans felt more like an intimidation tactic directed towards student protesters and organizers for divestment in Palestine rather than proportionate punishment for their involvement.
“We shouldn’t be punished for exercising our First Amendment rights,” a banned student said. “And punished so harshly. If this was a minor [punishment], I’d be like, ‘Okay, fuck you, but I can get past this,’ but it’s like, there’s no way to to get past it … It goes beyond students, but it’s so clear they don’t care about what’s happening in Palestine. This also is not gonna make life easier for professors, anybody.”
The student protesters felt misunderstood and that writing a ban appeal that Pomona College would accept was impossible.
“When given the chance to stand up for ourselves and clarify our role in the day, we’re told to reflect and that whatever we said wasn’t good enough,” a banned student said. “So, what could I possibly say that would be good enough? Except to completely denounce why I was there or what I actually care about.”
“I don’t understand why they have completely given up on their student population and the opinions of their student population, and wanting us to have any sense of community,” the student witness said. “Like, it sucks. I feel like I’m gonna graduate feeling shameful of the school that I went to.”
Photo Courtesy: Frances Walton ’26
