UCLA has implemented new policies and leadership changes in response to campus protests. The university has updated its presentation rules, which now prohibit masks for concealing identity during rule-breaking and restrict demonstration areas. Additionally, UCLA has appointed Steve Lurie, an experienced LAPD veteran, to head its new Office of Campus Safety.
Lurie recently announced that Craig Valenzuela, another LAPD veteran and a UCLA alumnus, will assume the role of UCLA’s police chief starting September 1. Valenzuela, who joined the LAPD in 1996, will lead a department that has been without a permanent chief since May 2024. The previous chief, John Thomas, was reassigned and subsequently resigned after facing criticism for the police response to violence during a campus encampment protest.
Despite these measures, including increased protest restrictions, more security personnel, and the swift closure of some pro-Palestinian events since spring 2024, many on campus feel that demonstration policies are not consistently or uniformly enforced. This concern has been a recurring theme in discussions at UC and campus forums, voiced by both pro-Israel and pro-Palestinian student groups.
Another notable development at UCLA is the appointment of Julio Frenk as chancellor on January 1. Frenk, whose father emigrated from Nazi Germany, took action three months into his tenure by banning Students for Justice in Palestine as a campus organization. This decision followed a protest organized by the group in front of a UC regent’s house that was subsequently vandalized. Chancellor Frenk also initiated a campus-wide effort to combat antisemitism.
Regarding the ongoing legal proceedings, Tuesday’s settlement may not definitively conclude the case. Judge Scarsi has established a 45-day period during which he can reopen the case if there is a valid reason why the settlement cannot be finalized.In a court filing on Tuesday, individuals involved in the campus encampment requested to be added as parties to the case. They argue that the settlement is inappropriate and could negatively impact students and faculty. The encampment participants contend that UCLA has not addressed their claims that the protest was not an exclusionary zone, noting that it included Jewish participants who held religious services. They assert that UCLA’s central claim is unfounded and that the requested relief would infringe upon the rights of students, faculty, and the campus community, rather than protecting free expression.
