In response to “Hopkins must hold Dr. Darren Klugman accountable” published November 30, 2023:
In response to “The Israel-Hamas war is not too complicated for Hopkins students” published October 18, 2023:
In response to “First Seed offers vegan, oil-free Indian food” published March 19, 2023: I appreciate the author writing about First Seed and was delighted to hear that she found the food flavorful and convenient. She noted that she personally did not find the pricing competitive with her local grocery store offerings. I am writing to offer the following additional context:
In response to “Our 2023–2024 SGA Exec. Board endorsements: Time to rebuild” published March 13, 2023:
In response to “Hopkins Dining union hosts forum to discuss negotiations with the University” published November 15, 2022: As a leader in food service operations for over 25 years, I’ve seen a lot. I’ve been all over the country working in universities, convention centers, hospitals, restaurants and even at a couple of Olympics. Last September, I came to JHU tasked with leading the transition of bringing our Homewood and Peabody dining operations in-house, and I can honestly say that it’s some of the most meaningful work that I’ve ever done.
In response to “Students claim discrimination led to their dismissal from School of Education Clinical Mental Health Counseling Program” published March 10, 2022:
In response to “Students react in wake of alleged intentional drugging at Sigma Phi Epsilon” published on November 10, 2021:
I appreciate Julia Zeng’s thoughts but would like to respond to the misrepresentations in her piece. This isn’t just a matter of who is right and who is wrong; perceptions of SGA have a major effect on what we are able to do for our student body.
Hopkins experimenter Shreesh Mysore seems to have difficulty deciding if his grotesque experiments on owls are actually worthwhile, and he may have committed a crime by having birds to experiment on at all.
As faculty affiliated with the Jewish Studies Program at Hopkins, we are deeply troubled by reports that a Hopkins teaching assistant spoke of penalizing students in her class on the basis of their identity and background — even for displaying an image of a street sign in Tel Aviv.
If you’ve been online recently, there has been much discussion on the left surrounding the efficacy of voting for Joe Biden. But here is the simple truth: The future of progressivism is, in no small part, hinged on defeating Donald Trump. Now, I will be clear: Voting for Joe Biden is neither the alpha nor the omega. We should be protesting under Trump; we should be protesting under Biden.
While I appreciate and encourage your interest in safety issues around campus, I find your editorial to be based on unfounded conjecture, insulting to victims and belittling of the trauma that they have experienced.
As president of our Student Government Association (SGA) and a member of the University-wide steering committee, I’ve been involved in fall planning for months. Equity has been a priority, and feedback is valuable. I thank the author of this article for airing their thoughts, but I would be remiss if I didn’t share my disagreement.
On behalf of the Board of Liquor License Commissioners for Baltimore City (BLLC), I write to address my concerns related to an article that was published in The Johns Hopkins News-Letter (“Panelists talk impact of lack of liquor regulations on black communities”) on November 21, 2019.
The recent article in The News-Letter (“What obstacles do Hopkins international students face?”) highlighted the difficulties faced by international undergraduate students. We wish to bring additional attention to the burdens faced by international graduate students.
Before I read the article “Unbelievable is not for the faint of heart,” I hadn’t heard of the show it discusses, which is about a woman who has been sexually assaulted.
In response to “Hopkins continues to undervalue the lives of its patients” published on Dec. 26.
The News-Letter editorial, “How can we fight the rising tide of hate in our country?” includes many useful thoughts, especially on the evils of anti-Semitism and its incubation on social-media platforms such as Gab. But it also relies on a misreading of the First Amendment’s fighting-words exemption to argue that “hate speech” is constitutionally “unprotected.”
If the values of “diversity” and “community engagement” are to be more than mere slogans — and if Hopkins is serious about its expressed commitment to equality — ending its contracts with ICE is non-negotiable.
In response to “On their own” published on April 26:
