News
In Columbia University's protests of 1968 and 2024, what's similar — and different
American activist Mark Rudd, center, president of Students for a Democratic Society (SDS), addresses students at Columbia University on May 3, 1968.
Hulton Archive/Getty Images
hide caption
toggle caption
Hulton Archive/Getty Images
American activist Mark Rudd, center, president of Students for a Democratic Society (SDS), addresses students at Columbia University on May 3, 1968.
Hulton Archive/Getty Images
A takeover of Columbia University’s South Lawn by pro-Palestinian students last week is drawing comparisons to 1968 — another time when police were called to clear protesting students from the campus.
There are parallels between the two high-profile events, most starkly the proliferation of similar protests around the country, as students call for an end to the war between Israel and Hamas in Gaza.
But there are also differences. Here’s a quick guide:
Several issues were at stake in 1968
For many Columbia students in 1968, their protest was motivated by anger over the Vietnam War — and changes to the military draft that were chipping away at students’ deferments, particularly in graduate schools.
The radical group Students for a Democratic Society (SDS) also opposed Columbia’s links to the Institute for Defense Analyses — a think tank researching and analyzing weapons and strategies to use in Vietnam. They also wanted the CIA and military services barred from on-campus recruiting.
But others, especially the Society of Afro-American Students (SAS), were also upset that Columbia University was moving ahead with plans to take over part of a public park in Harlem, to build a gym that critics said would give only limited and second-class access to the local community.
“They were building it in Morningside Park, one of the few green spaces in Harlem,” former Columbia student and current SUNY law professor Eleanor Stein told NPR’s Michel Martin. “And we felt that it couldn’t be business as usual, that the university itself was engaging in an indefensible takeover of Harlem land and an indefensible participation and complicity with the Vietnam War effort.”
White and Black students coordinated a protest against the gym — and then hundreds of students moved from there to take over office and classroom buildings, enforcing a strike against the school.
The current president cited a “clear and present danger”
Pro-Palestinian students set up tents to hold a demonstration on campus on the same day that Columbia University President Minouche Shafik testified in Congress about reports of antisemitism on Columbia’s campus — a session that school newspaper the Columbia Spectator followed with live coverage.
Her testimony followed months of debate and argument over free speech on campus. The school’s response to antisemitism is the subject of an investigation by the House Education Committee.
One day after the campus protesters took up their position on the South Lawn, Shafik asked police to remove them.
“I have determined that the encampment and related disruptions pose a clear and present danger to the substantial functioning of the University,” Shafik said last week, asking the New York Police Department to remove protesters one day day after.
“All University students participating in the encampment have been informed they are suspended. At this time, the participants in the encampment are not authorized to be on University property and are trespassing,” Shafik said.
Pro-Palestinian protesters gather at an encampment on the Columbia University campus in New York City on April 25, 2024.
Leonardo Munoz/AFP via Getty Images
hide caption
toggle caption
Leonardo Munoz/AFP via Getty Images
Pro-Palestinian protesters gather at an encampment on the Columbia University campus in New York City on April 25, 2024.
Leonardo Munoz/AFP via Getty Images
“With great regret, we request the NYPD’s help to remove these individuals.”
When the police were called onto campus in 1968, officers were blamed for violently arresting hundreds of students, using nightsticks and horses in a chaotic scene.
In contrast police and city officials said last week that the removal of the demonstrators from Columbia’s campus was peaceful, and no injuries were reported.
But after the wave of arrests, many students returned to the campus, setting up tents once again.
The 1968 protest occupied 5 buildings and included a hostage
Reporters for Columbia’s college radio station WKCR (including longtime NPR host Robert Siegel), were present when Henry Coleman, acting dean of Columbia College, sought to confirm his status as he stood among a crowd of students in the lobby of Hamilton Hall.
“Am I to understand then, that I am not allowed to leave this building?” Coleman asked, in an archival recording.
“Let me ask,” a male student replies. He then yells, “Is he to understand that he’s not going to leave this building?”
“Yes!” the crowd roars in response.
Why did the university delay calling police in 1968?
Part of the reason seems to be race.
The morning after students occupied Hamilton Hall, Black students aligned with SAS asked white students led by the SDS to leave.
“SAS leaders later explained that the spontaneous, participatory, and less-defined politics of SDS-led white students interfered” with the Black students’ goals that centered on racial justice and equity, according to an online history exhibit assembled by the Columbia’s library system.
Conditions inside Hamilton Hall were calm and quiet compared to the “boisterous” atmosphere elsewhere, the exhibit states. But university leaders viewed the Black-held hall as a powder keg — fearing that if police were called in against the students there, Harlem’s Black community would mount a violent reaction.
“In fact, when the police entered barricaded Hamilton Hall in the early hours of April 30, the occupying students avoided struggles with the police, calmly marched out the main entrance of the building to the police vans waiting on College Walk,” according to the library’s online exhibit.
What is the legacy of the 1968 campus protest?
“Although the war in Vietnam continued for seven more years, the protesters were, in many ways, successful,” wrote historian Rosalind Rosenberg of Columbia-affiliated Barnard College. “They persuaded Columbia to put an end to classified war research, cancel construction of the Morningside Park gym, ask ROTC to leave, and stop military and CIA recruitment.”
But some divisions emerged among the students: Black protesters asked their white counterparts to leave a building due to their different approach and focus, for instance. And women who were part of both groups cited their disillusionment with being left out of positions of power, spurring their embrace of the feminist movement.
News
How a Nation of Immigrants Traces Its Roots
Why are there so many Greeks in Tarpon Springs, Fla.? Because in the early 1900s, Greek sponge divers came from the Dodecanese islands and revolutionized the sponge industry on Florida’s gulf coast.
What explains the pockets of Portuguese and Cape Verdeans in New Bedford, Mass.? In the 1800s, winds pushed whaling boats east to the Azores and Cape Verde, where experienced whalers joined the crews.
There’s the Basque population in Boise, Idaho, whose ancestors traded a mountainous region between France and Spain for the American West in the hopes of finding gold but later turned to sheep herding. There are the families of Yemeni immigrants hired by Ford Motor Company to build cars in Detroit, and the Vietnamese refugees who were resettled near New Orleans and Houston, where they could carry on shrimping.
These stories are everywhere on this map of American ancestry, which shows how people described their backgrounds to the Census Bureau. There are nearly 200 unique identities represented; blend them — as 340 million Americans do — and we arrive at a jumbled, overlapping, story-filled infinity.
Much of what we see is a history of immigration. Over 250 years, the country has absorbed more than 100 million people. We can trace the pressures that pushed and pulled them here — and the policies that welcomed certain groups while keeping others out — through the patterns in where their descendants live today.
Now, a larger share of the country was born abroad than ever before, and the Trump administration’s sweeping immigration bans echo exclusionist policies enacted in response to similar demographic conditions a century ago.
Those policies defined Americans for generations. Recent efforts to limit immigration will likewise affect how future Americans understand their heritage and themselves.
How we got here
In the late 1700s, the area that would become the present-day United States was already diverse. At least 1.5 million Native people, and possibly many more, were living across the territory. They were joined by about three million Europeans and enslaved Africans living in both the English colonies and the French and Spanish territories.
From colonial times, immigration was an important contributor to population growth. It accelerated as the new country’s territory expanded west and immigrants arrived to settle it. From 1820 to 1860, more than five million people came, through a mostly open door.
With the advent of the steamship, the cost of passage plummeted, and companies offered special immigrant fares that were often coupled with rail tickets to the interior of the country. Once a community of immigrants was established somewhere, it tended to grow.
After 1840, immigration from Western Europe began to rise quickly as political instability in Germany and the famine in Ireland drove people to leave. Asian immigrants, drawn by the discovery of gold in California in 1848, were recruited to work on farms and railroads.
Later in the 19th century, pogroms across Eastern Europe and the aftermath of Italian reunification drove a surge of migration to the United States. From 1880 to 1920, 24 million immigrants arrived. They went almost everywhere except the South, where the land-owning elite already had cheap labor from the formerly enslaved and poor tenant farmers.
Cities swelled. In 1910, according to the Ellis Island National Museum of Immigration, three-quarters of the residents of Boston, Chicago, Cleveland, Detroit and New York City were immigrants or children of immigrants.
1850
2 million total immigrants
The 1850 census did not include data on the birthplace of enslaved people.
1910
14 million total immigrants
1970
9 million total immigrants
2024
50 million total immigrants
Many rural areas in the Midwest had a similar share of immigrants in 1910, but newcomers to the cities tended to be from novel sources like Russia or Italy. That meant there were more languages, more cuisines and more workers. It also meant there were more crowds, more slums and more people behaving in unfamiliar ways — fodder to drive views that the new immigrants were unassimilable and that policies were needed to keep them out.
The first federal law to severely limit immigration had come much earlier, in 1882, when practically all Chinese people were barred from entering the country. More restrictions followed, and eventually animosity toward new immigrants led to the passage of laws in the 1920s creating a quota system tied to nationality.
Western Europeans were given generous quotas and Southern and Eastern Europeans much smaller ones. For the rest of the Eastern Hemisphere, the quotas were set to almost nothing. Ships raced through the night to reach New York Harbor, all trying to be first to dock at Ellis Island.
There weren’t quotas for countries in the Americas and the Caribbean, but there were other restrictions. Mexicans faced mass deportation campaigns in the 1930s and 1950s, even as millions were recruited as temporary workers to fill agricultural jobs across the Southwest.
Over the next 40 years, these rules drove the foreign-born population in the United States to its lowest levels. Children of immigrants replaced immigrants, blending into American society while retaining their own cultural traditions.
Then, alongside the civil rights movement of the 1960s, activists and lawmakers who saw the national quota system as racist pushed to replace it with one based on employment and family ties.
Another decades-long wave of immigration followed, this time from different parts of the world.
Chart data is unavailable.
Share of immigrants in the United States by region of birth
The new rules allowed people to sponsor their family members and relatives, and they gave preference to workers with advanced degrees and specialized skills. The family visas, in particular, led to an unforeseen boom in immigration.
An expanded refugee program also brought more immigrants, many from Southeast Asia who were displaced by Cold War conflicts.
For the first time, immigrants from the Western Hemisphere faced limits on their numbers. Similar to the European workers who arrived earlier in the century, many chose to settle in the United States permanently instead of risking returning to their home countries between periods of working in the United States. Millions who couldn’t get visas turned to entering illegally.
The most recent immigration wave, during the Biden administration, was different still: The number of visas for immigrants remained steady, while migrants from Central America arrived at the southwest border in large numbers to seek asylum. Desperate conditions in Cuba, Haiti and Venezuela, as well as wars in Afghanistan, Ukraine and elsewhere led hundreds of thousands of people to flee to the United States — many of them drawn to established communities of immigrants from their countries.
Where we are today
The lines of American ancestry today are not neatly drawn, and groups overlap and spill into one another. Some people don’t answer the census questions about their origins at all. For others, it’s complicated. Descendents of enslaved people, for example, may identify themselves as African American because they are unable to trace their roots to a specific place.
Many areas have truly mixed populations, with people of several different ancestries nearly equally represented.
Take this area just southwest of Houston, for example:
Nigerian, Jordanian, Mexican, Vietnamese, African American, Salvadoran, Iraqi, German, English, Irish and Chinese people are all among the top groups in these neighborhoods.
Every city has its own distinct pattern, visualized in the the patchwork of gold, green and blue in Los Angeles, the stark reds, blues and yellows of Chicago, a purple Minneapolis, a green Honolulu:
Who comes next?
If the patterns in these maps reflect the immigration policies of at least a century ago, we can expect them to shift and change again as a result of contemporary decisions about who makes up the American mosaic.
No comprehensive immigration legislation has passed Congress since the 1980s. After a surge of immigration during the Biden administration, in which an estimated eight million people entered the country over three years, demographic experts now estimate that the United States could reach net-zero or negative immigration sometime soon. That is in part because of the Trump administration’s aggressive actions to speed deportations of people who are in the country illegally and to limit pathways to legal immigration.
At the same time, the factors that pull immigrants to the United States remain strong. And, unlike 100 years ago, the country now faces a declining population and work force. The tension between the need for new workers and resurgent nativist politics will influence who comes, who settles and who is counted among the ancestors of future generations.
About the data
The ancestry maps in this article and the related interactive map draw from seven tables of race, ethnicity and ancestry data that the Census Bureau published as part of the American Community Survey estimates for 2019-2024.
The census ancestry and origin data are estimates based on a sample of the population and include margins of error that can be large for small population groups. We used the estimates published by the Census Bureau without adjustment.
In the survey, respondents are asked questions about their race and whether they are of Hispanic or Latino origin. Each of those questions allows respondents to list their national origins. An additional question asks about their ancestries. People can claim multiple ancestries or origins and appear in multiple categories.
Some groups appear in multiple tables. For example, people can select “white” as their race and list “German” as a specific origin. Separately, anyone can also choose “German” in response to the survey’s ancestry question. For such groups, we used the table with the higher value for the country as a whole. In a small number of cases, similar ancestries were grouped together.
Colors for each census tract are blended based on the adjusted number of people who reported being of each race and ancestry in the tract, for each group above a minimum threshold.
In charts of the immigrant population, counts come from Census Bureau research publications, the 2000 census and the American Community Survey. Those counts include only foreign-born residents and exclude any descendants born in the United States.
News
What the SCOTUS campaign finance ruling means, according to an expert
Former Federal Election Commission Chairman Trevor Potter testifies during a Senate Rules and Administration Committee hearing on artificial intelligence and the future of elections on Capitol Hill in Washington, D.C., Sept. 27, 2023.
Drew Angerer/Getty Images
hide caption
toggle caption
Drew Angerer/Getty Images

The Supreme Court struck down limits on how much political parties can spend in coordination with their candidates in a 6-3 decision split along ideological lines. The ruling is the latest in a series of Supreme Court decisions that have loosened campaign finance restrictions, overturning a 2001 precedent that upheld the spending limits.
Former Federal Election Commission Chairman Trevor Potter, who now serves as president of the Campaign Legal Center, joined NPR’s Morning Edition to break down the ruling. Speaking to NPR’s Michel Martin, Potter discussed why the court reversed its earlier precedent, how the ruling changes campaign finance rules and whether greater transparency could address concerns about corruption.
Listen to the full interview by clicking on the blue play button above. And read takeaways from the conversation below.
The post-Watergate limits were meant to prevent corruption
Potter said they were designed to stop donors from routing large contributions through national party committees to directly fund a favored candidate’s campaign. The restrictions were intended to prevent “an obvious way around” campaign contribution limits.
The court previously upheld the same limits
Asked why the Supreme Court upheld the law about 20 years ago, Potter said the justices concluded the restrictions were a constitutional way to prevent corruption. He said the court viewed them as an “anti-circumvention measure” to stop donors from using political parties to bypass contribution limits.
Potter rejects the majority’s rationale
Potter rejected the majority’s view that political parties have less political power than outside groups, saying earlier Supreme Court decisions allowing unlimited outside spending created that imbalance. He pointed to Justice Elena Kagan’s dissent in support of that argument.
Disclosure wouldn’t necessarily reveal private fundraising arrangements
Potter said disclosure alone would not address his concerns because it cannot reveal private agreements between candidates and donors. While campaign donations to political parties are public, he said voters would not see behind-the-scenes requests from candidates asking donors to contribute to party committees that later support their campaigns.
“We’re never going to see that,” Potter said. “I don’t think there’s a way to practically disclose those backroom deals.”
This interview was written for the web by Majd Al-Waheidi and edited by Treye Green.
News
Woman survives falling 1,500 feet down Mount Shasta
A woman suffered several injuries but survived falling 1,500 feet down California’s Mount Shasta on Sunday, officials said.
The climber, 31, was attempting to ascend the mountain, which is technically a stratovolcano with the second-highest peak in the Cascades, according to the U.S. Forest Service. She was climbing in a group of three novices at an elevation of around 13,000 feet when she fell.
She suffered a suspected ankle fracture and “additional injuries consistent with the significant fall,” although she was found alert and “in good spirits,” the forest service said. Officials haven’t identified the climber.
Efforts to locate and rescue the woman got underway at around noon on Sunday and involved three climbing rangers from the forest service as well as members of the California Highway Patrol. An initial helicopter search was limited because of cloud cover on the mountain, the forest service said, prompting one ranger to ascend a portion of the mountain on foot to reach her. One member of the woman’s climbing party helped carry rescue equipment, as did a fourth climber who stopped to assist.
California Highway Patrol safely removed the woman from the mountain at around 5:30 p.m., and she was eventually taken to Mercy Medical Center Mount Shasta for medical care, according to the forest service.
The agency said the woman’s fall “serves as an important reminder that Mount Shasta is a high-altitude mountaineering environment, not a hike,” and “experienced climbers can encounter rapidly ranging weather, steep snow and ice, rockfall, and hazardous fall conditions.”
It also encouraged prospective climbers to “be honest about your experience and physical conditioning” before attempting to summit the mountain.
The woman and her climbing party were ascending Mount Shasta along a route called Avalanche Gulch, which “is steep and rigorous requiring crampons, a mountain axe, helmet, and basic snow travel skills,” according to the Mount Shasta Avalanche Center. It takes climbers up a 7,000-foot vertical ascent that features “steep snow and ice, rock fall, and weather extremes,” the center said.
-
Georgia7 minutes agoGeorgia launches address protection program for violence, trafficking survivors
-
Hawaii10 minutes agoBBC Audio | Witness History | Hawaii becomes the 50th American state
-
Idaho15 minutes agoIdaho State Board appoints David W. Hahn as eighth president of Boise State University
-
Illinois22 minutes agoIllinois 250 invites every resident to help tell the state’s story | Ep. 1 of 6
-
Indiana25 minutes agoSubmit your nature art for DNR hard card licenses
-
Iowa30 minutes agoCubs Minor League Wrap: Aaron Bummer, Liam Hendriks pitch for Iowa
-
Kansas37 minutes agoMan pleads guilty to murder, kidnapping in estranged wife’s death in northeast Wichita
-
Kentucky40 minutes agoKentucky Adds Three More International Swimmers to Women’s 2026 Recruiting Class