Brown University Board of Trustees Silent After Campus Tragedy
In the wake of a devastating shooting at Brown University that claimed the lives of two students on December 13, the institution’s board of trustees—a powerful collective of influential business leaders, entrepreneurs, artists, and academics—has maintained a conspicuous silence. Despite their position as the university’s highest governing body, not a single member of this distinguished group has publicly addressed the tragedy that shook the campus community to its core. The board, led by Chancellor Brian Moynihan (CEO of Bank of America), includes notable figures such as Goldman Sachs’ Rich Friedman, Stripe COO Claire Hughes Johnson, former U.S. Representative David Cicilline, and various other prominent individuals from banking, entertainment, and academia. While their primary responsibility involves financial oversight rather than day-to-day operations, they do hold significant authority, including the power to appoint and evaluate the university president and approve long-term strategic planning.
The silence from Brown’s leadership comes at a particularly difficult moment for the university community, which is grappling with serious questions about campus security and the administration’s response to the tragedy. The shooter, identified as Portuguese national Claudio Neves-Valente, reportedly spent time canvassing the campus before carrying out his attack. Even more troubling, a university custodian told the Boston Globe that he had spotted the gunman approximately a dozen times prior to the shooting, hiding in bathrooms and exhibiting suspicious behavior that was reported to campus security in November—a potential missed opportunity to prevent the tragedy. The investigation was further complicated by limited surveillance equipment in the engineering building where the shooting occurred, and ironically, authorities relied heavily on information from a homeless individual who had been living in the building’s basement—raising additional questions about campus security protocols.
University President Christina Paxson, who earns over $3 million annually, has faced intense criticism for her handling of both the preventative security measures and the response after the shooting. When questioned about whether a lack of cameras hindered the investigation, Paxson surprisingly claimed, “I do not think a lack of cameras in that building had anything to do with what happened there.” Her official statement following the discovery of Neves-Valente’s body (found dead by suicide in New Hampshire) notably focused on condemning “gun violence” and “harmful doxxing activity” while mentioning that the shooter had briefly attended Brown more than two decades ago with “no indication of any concerns pertaining to conduct or any public safety interactions” during that time. This response has been criticized as inadequate and deflective by many within and outside the university community.
The tragedy expanded beyond Brown’s campus when, days after killing two Ivy League students, Neves-Valente allegedly murdered an MIT professor in his home. This additional loss of life has intensified scrutiny of Brown’s security failures, with many suggesting that had the shooter been apprehended sooner, the MIT professor might still be alive. The university now faces potential lawsuits related to the shootings, and has retained former U.S. Attorney Zachary Cunha for legal representation. Despite multiple attempts by Fox News to contact individual board members and the university administration about plans to address the tragedy, implement new security measures, or discuss the future of Brown University, no responses were received, further reinforcing the perception of institutional silence in a moment that calls for leadership.
The Brown University shooting raises profound questions about the responsibilities of educational institutions to provide safe environments for their students and staff. The apparent breakdown in communication between custodial staff who noticed suspicious activity, campus security who received reports, and university leadership creates a troubling picture of institutional negligence. For families of the victims and the broader university community, the silence from the board of trustees—individuals who collectively represent some of the most successful leaders in American business, politics, and culture—may feel particularly painful. While their fiduciary responsibilities are clear, many would argue that moral leadership in times of crisis is equally important for those entrusted with guiding one of America’s oldest and most prestigious universities.
As the Brown University community continues to mourn and heal, the absence of public engagement from its highest governing body creates a leadership vacuum at a moment when direction and reassurance are desperately needed. The tragedy has exposed significant vulnerabilities in campus safety protocols that extend beyond Brown to universities nationwide. Moving forward, educational institutions must balance their academic missions with an increasingly urgent responsibility to protect their communities from violence—a challenge that requires transparent communication, decisive action, and genuine accountability from leadership at all levels, starting with those who hold the greatest authority and influence.
