A storm of protest erupted at Columbia University, ultimately leading to the cancellation of a virtual career expo linked to the Department of Homeland Security. Faculty members voiced fierce objections, arguing that even advertising the event signaled an unacceptable endorsement of policies they consider authoritarian.
The event, a U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) Virtual Career Expo planned for February 18th, offered prospective applicants a direct line to federal law enforcement recruiters through online chats. Multiple agencies within the Department of Homeland Security were slated to participate, raising immediate concerns among a coalition of faculty.
The faculty coalition issued a powerful statement, asserting that promoting the expo would erode trust within the campus community and potentially endanger students. They believed Columbia risked appearing complicit in a troubling shift towards authoritarian practices, and warned that silence would be interpreted as agreement.
University officials responded by clarifying that the event’s listing did not constitute an endorsement. It had appeared on the School of Professional Studies’ Career Design Lab website through 12twenty, a third-party platform connecting students and alumni with a wide range of employers.
Columbia emphasized that the university does not directly control or vet the employers featured on the 12twenty network. They maintained that the presence of a job posting or career event should not be seen as a sponsorship or endorsement by the university itself, and participation remained entirely voluntary.
The 12twenty platform routinely features opportunities from numerous federal agencies, including the CDC, EPA, FBI, FDA, FEMA, and IRS, highlighting the breadth of its reach. This context, however, did little to quell the initial concerns raised by faculty.
In a subsequent statement, Columbia announced a change in policy: the Career Design Lab website would now exclusively showcase events directly organized by the School of Professional Studies. Students and alumni would still have access to the broader range of external opportunities through the 12twenty platform, but they would no longer be prominently featured on the university’s primary career page.
The decision sparked debate beyond the university walls. A retired schoolteacher, Rich Candia, publicly defended the career expo, arguing that students deserve access to information about all potential career paths, including those in federal law enforcement.
Candia criticized the university’s actions as hypocritical, pointing out the emphasis on “choice” in education while simultaneously limiting students’ access to certain employment opportunities. He argued that denying students information about federal careers effectively silences those who might be genuinely interested in pursuing them.
The controversy underscores a growing tension between academic institutions and government agencies, particularly those involved in law enforcement and border security. It raises fundamental questions about the role of universities in facilitating career opportunities and the extent to which they should distance themselves from potentially controversial employers.
