A specific moment of urgency: An interview with Brown Divest Coalition students arrested for trespass

"I chose to sit in, even though I was scared. I was aware of the risks. I know the risks are nothing compared to the violence that kids in Gaza are facing right now..."

Brown University arrested 41 students on December 11, students who refused to leave University Hall over the Brown Corporation's refusal to divest from companies that profit from Israel's war in Palestine. The students were part of the Brown Divest Coalition.¹

On November 7, 20 students with the group BrownU Jews for Ceasefire Now were arrested and charged in a similar protest, only to see those charges dropped in the wake of the hate crime shooting of a Palestinian Brown University student, Hisham Awartani, who was in Vermont during Thanksgiving break.

Earlier this week I spoke with Brown University students Gabi Venegas Ramirez, Garrett Brand, and Carla Humphries, all members of the Brown Divest Coalition. Ramirez and Brand were arrested inside University Hall on December 11. Humphries was an organizer outside the building. The interview was conducted over Zoom and has been edited for clarity.

Steve Ahlquist: More than the political asks, which I think you covered in your press releases and at the protest, what were your personal reasons for wanting to do this action?

Garrett Brand: My personal reasons were manyfold. Specifically, I came to this for two main reasons. One, the moment that we're in feels like a specific moment of urgency for a confluence of reasons, mainly being the way violence has escalated so drastically after the seven-day pause that happened - escalating even more than it was beforehand. Also, the fact that there was a prior sit-in where students were arrested and their demands weren't met in any substantive way. There's a need to keep up the pressure for divestment, which is what we materially feel we can do as students here, and the urgency of the moment after Hisham Awartan was shot in Vermont added a sense that something needs to happen now. We were all about to go on winter break, so we couldn't wait. It wouldn't make sense to wait until the end of January or early February to do another sit-in or something like that because by then there might not be a Gaza.

And personally, I can say I wanted to sit in. As a Black student, I approach activism - and I can't speak for everybody - but I feel like there's a sense among activists of color that, as people who experience oppression, we can recognize it when we see it and then feel some moral obligation to stand against it in whatever capacity we can, no matter where it's happening or who it's impacting. Right now that means standing for and with the people of Palestine. That informed a lot of my thinking, especially given the legacy of collaboration and back-and-forth assistance between Black Lives Matter activists and Palestinian activists.

Gabi Venegas Ramirez: There's a sense of urgency because we do not know in even a few days how much more this can escalate, and the fact that our university responded with violence to the 20 students who were arrested before. Ours was an escalated action, to keep putting pressure on the university. I have been part of Brown SJP. I've been raised on Palestinian liberation. My entire family has always been very dedicated to that. We're not Palestinian at all. My dad is Chilean and my mom is Colombian. But to what Garrett is saying, we are students of color and we recognize oppression. We recognize militarization and dehumanization around the world. Not only that, this is a genocide. It is one of the first live-streamed genocides. We have all the information and the images at our fingertips. It's like the Vietnam War, which was televised. We can't ignore these violations of human rights when they're presented so brutally in our faces.

I feel what my parents have always taught me, what my grandparents have always taught me - all we're doing is fighting for human rights and people's liberation. I made the personal choice to do the sit-in apart from just fighting for Palestine in my day-to-day activism. I chose to sit in, even though I was scared. I was aware of the risks. I know the risks are nothing compared to the violence that kids in Gaza are facing right now. I can't go on with my day knowing what is going on - the fact that kids my age, kids younger than me, I mean, not even just kids - just people - are being literally torn apart across the world. I can't just sit in a classroom knowing that my school is investing in this violence.

Steve Ahlquist: I've been at the scene of many protests and arrests. I always feel an extra sense of fraughtness when the people who are risking arrest or voluntarily being arrested are people of color, because we know how the criminal justice system can be extra-extra when it comes to certain people. I've seen white elderly nuns arrested for climate issues and they're always treated so gently - as they should be - but people of color often lack such privilege. Do you want to speak to that at all?

Gabi Venegas Ramirez: I'm a person of color but I am in a place of privilege in the sense that I'm not an Arab, Muslim, or Palestinian student. That is what made me say, I can do this. It was scary. I think there is a sense of, you might say, intergenerational trauma. My parents have been victims of police violence and police brutality in the United States and their own homes back in Chile and Columbia. And I have myself been tear-gassed at other protests. So there was that sense of fear, but also, I had to do it. I have some privilege in this context.

Garrett Brand: I echo that. I've been raised to be aware of what the police can and will do to me or my friends. But I feel, specifically in terms of this action, that it is different than other actions. I know Gabby has participated in actions in other places where the police get violent, which again doesn't stop us from doing things like this, but I feel like we hold a certain amount of privilege as students at an Ivy League university. There's a level of legitimacy and protection there that unfortunately most other people don't have access to. Not to say what the police will or won't do, because you can't predict that. But it would be shocking if the police decided to brutalize some students of color inside one of our university buildings.

Steve Ahlquist: I would agree, but I never try to predict the reactions of the police.

Garrett Brand: Yeah, exactly. You can't ever fully account for it, but it feels like there's an amount of privilege and protection we have just by being students here. I think we collectively felt we had a duty to leverage that privilege in whatever way we could, especially since we, as students, hold the most sway over the university in terms of pushing for something like divestment.

Steve Ahlquist: When 20 students were arrested about a month ago, charges weren't dropped until the day after the shooting of Hisham in Vermont. In my mind, that means that the charges weren't dropped based on ethical considerations, it was done for public appearances. The university did not want to prosecute students for protesting while another student was shot in a hate crime related to the issue being protested.

I've spoken to people at the university who tell me off the record that Brown is not inclined to drop these charges. In fact, in their press release, Brown said that if these incidents continue to occur, they're going to bring more charges, not just trespassing. What does that mean, in the sense of wanting to get the charges dropped against the 41 students recently arrested, yourselves included, and the potential discipline against students who may act in the future?

In the nineties, there was a sit-in in University Hall for needs blind admissions… where over 250 students were arrested. Their picture is hanging in the alumni center… Who knows? Maybe in 20-30 years, they'll put a picture of us up in a building somewhere.

Garrett Brand: I think Brown's response to students coming to the university with demands is very telling, especially given the university's response to students who went through the “appropriate channels.” We brought reports prepared by the university's advisory committee and we demanded that Brown University President Christina Paxson bring those reports to the Brown Corporation board for a vote. It's telling that the university is willing to arrest first 20 now a total of 61 students, and is hanging this nebulous threat against anybody who does anything similar in the future. They're willing to do all of that against their own student body before even pretending to listen to their demands. Christina Paxson will presumably arrest a hundred more students and bring higher charges against them before bringing the report to the corporation. We're not even asking her to pledge to support it or anything.

I think that tells us about the president and the administration's stance on student activism in general. Brown has a reputation of being the Activist Ivy - very liberal, progressive, whatever - when in reality a lot of that is just the co-opting of movements in the past that were against the university when the university was very repressive in the moment. In the nineties, there was a sit-in in University Hall for needs blind admissions - which we have now because of that protest - where over 250 students were arrested. Their picture is hanging in the alumni center. It's common knowledge on campus now that this is the university's tactic.

Who knows? Maybe in 20-30 years, they'll put a picture of us up in a building somewhere. But we don't have 20 or 30 years to wait because we're talking about Gaza. Gaza may not have 20 or 30 days, so we are going to keep pushing for immediate action in terms of what we can do, which is divestment, which the university is not powerless to do. It's been quite clearly outlined, no matter what CPax says, that they could achieve that.

Gabi Venegas Ramirez: I think Garrett put it pretty well. We are just following this tradition of taking over University Hall.

Steve Ahlquist: Another thing Brown could do is suspend or expel students - use Brown's punishment system instead of the law. What are your considerations there? The university could decide that the next set of student activists is going to be expelled. What happens then? It's a pretty big deal to graduate from Brown and being expelled can be a lifelong mark against you. How does that change your calculus?

Gabi Venegas Ramirez: When we were considering the possibility of being suspended or more escalated charges from the university against us in terms of student conduct - I don't know about the group - but in my head, I thought that if they try to suspend or expel us, there would be a public outcry. Brown is a school that cares about its public image and appearance, especially because Brown is a school that, as Garrett mentioned, loves its legacy of student activism. It loves this image of being more hippie, more liberal. People call it the “Woke Ivy.” That's what keeps me reassured. I don't think Brown would try to expel us or try to suspend us. And if they did, public pressure would not let it happen. And if they did it anyway, it would be a stain on Brown's history and I'm happy to contribute to that.

Steve Ahlquist: Brown would certainly see a different type of student wanting to go to their university in the future because students like you will be thinking, “If this is the way they're going to treat people like me, why would I want to go there?”

Garrett Brand: It would hurt their admissions. There's already such an overwhelming backlash against the university for having students arrested in the first place. And this is coming from the Brown community - not considering external support or backlash - but just from thousands of alumni and from faculty who otherwise wouldn't take a stance on the Gaza issue, but feel strongly about students being arrested by the university. We have a polling group on campus that isn't perfect data, but they did a poll on whether or not students should have been arrested and 80% of students who answered said no.

Steve Ahlquist: That's Interesting. I was wondering about that because wherever you stand on the issue of Palestine and Israel, you can still be for the ability of students to express themselves and advocate for their beliefs.

Garrett Brand: That seems to be a uniting sentiment among the student body, faculty, and alumni on campus. In terms of campus climate, arresting students like us has been a uniting force in the student body. We've had hundreds of people come out to support both groups of arrested students. People are on board with students not being arrested, even if they aren't necessarily on board with what we're saying, or they're not the activist type or whatever. People think it's weird for students to be arrested by their university and specifically, with the way that these arrests were carried out, where they effectively turned University Hall into a jail. That rubs people the wrong way,

Steve Ahlquist: That was weird. I've been at dozens of protests where arrests have happened. I've seen people at the State House, for instance, fake arrested. Police put them in handcuffs, brought them outside as if they were going to arrest them, and then just took the handcuffs off and said, “See you later.” But I've never seen police handcuffing, fingerprinting, and issuing a court date inside a building, out of sight of the public, and then letting people go. Can you explain the process to me?

Gabi Venegas Ramirez: We were in this little circular rotunda room of the building, in the lobby, and one by one the police would come into the room...

Garrett Brand: There was no rhyme or reason for the order. The cops would just come in and pick someone...

Gabi Venegas Ramirez: Someone at random and pass them into the hallway. They were patted down one by one. I'm forgetting all the steps. We got our mugshots taken.

Garrett Brand: They didn't handcuff us.

Gabi Venegas Ramirez: Just fingerprints, then they took our names, address, and Social Security numbers and then just gave us our court date, and said, “Okay, you're free to go.”

Steve Ahlquist: I had never seen anything like that before.

Gabi Venegas Ramirez: It didn't make sense to us either. We were going back and forth with questions with the police officer in charge because at first, he said he was going to handcuff us. I don't know if you remember Garrett, but he said, “We're going to handcuff you guys, and then at the door, we'll take the handcuffs off. Then you're free to go because we don't want to handcuff you guys outside.” He reasoned that it's dark out, and we want you guys to be able to use your hands to move through the crowd.

Garrett Brand: That's actually what he said.

Gabi Venegas Ramirez: But then it turned out that they didn't handcuff us. It was a very shady explanation.

Steve Ahlquist: So now you've got court dates scheduled over January when you come back from break.

Garrett Brand: Our initial arraignment dates were spread over nine days, and they were scheduled earlier in January before our break was over. Our lawyers are working to get the dates pushed back. My day is currently January 9th, but I think people have dates scheduled until the 18th.

Steve Ahlquist: Brown leadership seems unwilling to consider student demands. So what is the way forward here? Is it more protests and more arrests? How can you get to a place where you can resolve this issue? The issue to my mind isn't necessarily peace in Gaza, or a ceasefire, which would be great, but that's not what you're after here. You're demanding that President Paxson bring a divestment vote to the board, and she won't.

Is she afraid the board might vote to divest? I think the Brown Board is conservative enough to vote it down, but the individual members probably don't want to be on record for this vote. I don't know. But it seems to me easy enough to bring it to the board, have them vote on it, and it doesn't pass. Then activists can start bringing their protests to the board. What is the next step?

Garrett Brand: That's a good question. I think your analysis is pretty similar to where we are. We don't understand why Christina Paxson won't bring it to the board if there's presumably no support for it. The only thing we can think of is what you're saying: Maybe the Corporation doesn't want to take the fall for it and they want to let it sit on CPax. I can't speak to that. This is all speculation.

As for the path forward, we keep pushing for divestment, whatever that looks like. I don't think we know exactly what that looks like yet. But I think all 61 students who've been arrested thus far, and the hundreds of students who have supported them will tell you that none of them are in a place to give up the fight. I don't think anybody's spirit has been broken. I don't think anybody's resolve has wavered. I think all of us are committed to doing whatever we can to make sure this happens next semester.

Carla Humphries: Each incident of arrest has engaged a greater part of the Brown community because, at this point, people who would not necessarily engage with this issue have engaged as a result of their friends or other students getting arrested. It's brought so much attention to the issue. The base of support and public pressure is increasing. They are also calling into question CPax's decision not to put it forward to the Corporation when there is so much public attention being brought by students, which is something obviously that they want to avoid.

Garrett Brand: It's gotten personal for a lot of people. 61 people have a lot of friends who don't want to see their friends arrested.

Gabi Venegas Ramirez: The number of people supporting our movement is increasing. After the 20 students were arrested, the number of students who were willing to do a sit-in increased, and it resulted in us being able to do it with these 41 students. And I've heard a lot of other students say that if there's a third sit-in, they want to participate.

Like you said, Steve, the board might not follow through with this investment. They might not support it because it is, as you say, conservative, but Christina Paxson refuses to bring the report forward. Students, the media, the public, and parents are realizing that Christina Paxson doesn't want to listen to students, period.

Steve Ahlquist: Back when Brown was first confronted by the idea of divestment by students, the University set up a series of steps. When students took those steps and issued a report and a vote on campus revealed 80% support for divestment, the school demurred. I doubt the University was ever behaving sincerely. The University put students through this big process hoping that at any point the effort would run out of steam and fail.

Garrett Brand: This is just par for the course with any university dealing with student activists. They like to weaponize bureaucracy to shut us down. That's the purpose of these committees in the first place. Things like this take months of students' time. The idea is to wait them out until they graduate or study abroad or whatever - to hopefully kill the momentum. But what's been proven by this divestment movement is that the momentum can't be killed. We're the second or third batch of students pushing for this. At this point, all of the original people have graduated. We weren't here when the initial report happened, but we're still escalating around it.

Christina Paxson can decide to bring it to the corporation for a vote. The corporation can vote on it. What happened is that Christina Paxson not only did not bring the report to the corporation, but she dissolved the divestment committee entirely and reformed it into what's now known as ACURM, the Advisory Committee on University Resource Management, which is a diluted, less powerful, less specific version of the original committee. It still handles divestment concerns, but also other things, and is marginally less powerful, even though the original incarnation was also only advisory. It has no real power, but that's the committee that students have to go through for any sort of divestment concerns.

Gabi Venegas Ramirez: And it's made up of teachers and faculty...

Garrett Brand: And a couple of student positions.

We are going to keep demanding divestment because our Palestinian students and classmates have been demanding it for years. Before he was shot, when Hisham was meeting with Christina Paxson, he explicitly told her that Brown's investments in the violence against his family and his people back home in Palestine make him and other Palestinian students unsafe here in the United States. Then we saw what happened. He got shot in a hate crime. That has not moved Christina Paxson or the administration in a significant way.

That's the asymmetry in response and care given to different groups of students involved in this conflict. The university has tried to play at neutrality for public relations, but it has been quite clear to the student body that they've favored one group of students over another at the expense of Palestinian students, and they keep making that clear by not taking divestment seriously.

Carla Humphries: There's been a lack of explicit recognition of the violence towards Palestinians that is happening in Gaza. There was a vigil after October 7th organized by Hillel which President Paxson went to and spoke at, then, when the chaplain's office organized a vigil for Palestinians, she wasn't there.

Garrett Brand: In all of the email correspondence we receive, it's very easy to tell. The language that is used is very similar to mainstream media language where it mourns the loss of all life and doesn't use the word Palestinian and things like that.

Steve Ahlquist: That mirrors a lot of what I'm hearing from our federal delegation and the governor. There's a reluctance to call into question the actions of Israel.

Thank you so much for your time.

[For more on Brown and Divestment, see: Build This World from Love: Five weeks and four decades of anti-apartheid student organizing]

1. Press release from the Brown Dovest Coalition:

On Monday, December 11, 41 students peacefully sat in Brown University’s main administrative building, University Hall. The diverse coalition of students sang and sat together to call for divestment in the wake of the Nov. 25 shooting of their classmate Hisham Awartani. Brown University and Providence Police Department officers then arrested and processed all 41 students on-site in University Hall, effectively turning the building into a temporary police precinct. Police photographed, fingerprinted, and provided students with their arrest paperwork. While they continued to sing and embrace each other, the 41 students were led out of the building one by one through three alternating exit doors into the Main and Quiet Greens. Hundreds of supporters waited outside in the cold from 4:45 PM to 10 PM to receive the students.

Brown University has not dropped the criminal violation charges of willful trespassing against the 41 students. The Brown University Department of Public Safety set the court arraignment dates to be 6 different dates from January 9 to the 18th. All the arraignments will occur during the students’ winter break. Alumni, faculty, and students, including the 20 Jewish students who were arrested for sitting in a month earlier, continue to support the Brown Divest Coalition. Brown Alumni have organized a fundraiser for legal fees and an email campaign to demand Brown University drop the charges with over $12,000 raised and 2300 emails sent in the past two days. Brown University is still refusing to drop the charges against the 41 students who sat in to call for divestment despite support from alumni, faculty, and the student body. Brown Divest Coalition continues to demand that President Christina Paxson publicly commit to present and endorse the 2020 ACCRIP report in the next Brown Corporation meeting.