Sakib Khan
LSAC Account Number: 27019580 Personal Statement
Most students don’t spend their nights managing riots. Nevertheless, I recently found
myself in the middle of one at Columbia University, flanked by the Minutemen and College
Republicans on one side and protestors on the other. I offered my assistance to the organizers
and requested that the protestors leave the stage. As the curtain fell on the protestors, the
Republicans, the Minutemen, and me, I found myself in an all too familiar position—outside, yet
in the middle. As both an elected representative of the Republicans and a political sympathizer
of the protestors, I was at the center of the Minuteman event and fallout. However, as neither a
protestor nor an organizer, my position was outside of the direct conflict. From this position, I
advocated for the sanctity of the “marketplace of ideas.”
My reaction to the invitation of the Minutemen Project, a vigilante border patrol group,
ranged from disgust to support, reflecting my sometimes-schizophrenic responsibilities on
campus. As an activist in the Muslim community, I was saddened and angered that the
Republicans would invite a group that would provoke minority students. As the Chair of the
Student Governing Board (SGB), the governing board for all religious, political and activist
clubs, I supported the Republican’s ability to host this event. I recognized my obligation to
ensure that all student groups could host any speaker for any event, no matter how objectionable.
To balancing obligations, I have separated my governing responsibilities from my own
political beliefs. When I, as President of the Muslim Students Association, invited Norman

Sakib Khan
LSAC Account Number: 27019580 Personal Statement pg. 2 of 3
Finkelstein to speak on the Israel-Palestine conflict, I met with leaders of pro-Israel groups to
assure them that I would create space for them to protest in any manner that would not disrupt
our event. We were able to disagree about the conflict, but agree that my duty was to ensure that
all students retain a solid platform for speech. Later when a pro-Israel group applied for
recognition as an SGB group, I parted with the pro-Palestinian movement to promote the group’s
right to an equal speech platform. I felt comfortable setting aside my personal views to advocate
for the expression of ideas by all groups and support the marketplace of ideas.
With that backdrop, my goal was to manage the Minutemen event as smoothly as
possible. I recognized that any disruption of the event would reflect poorly on the event’s
opposition, detract from the issue of immigration, and most dangerously, create the possibility of
retribution. With my responsibilities in mind, I advised the Chicano Caucus to keep their protest
outside the auditorium. At the same time, I went to the Republicans with the protest plans, to
prepare them for the possibility that their event might invite vocal and public condemnation. It
seemed as though my plan would work with the protestors vigorously protesting the event
without infringing upon the Republicans’ speech platform. Through my shuttle diplomacy and
attempts to shape expectations on both sides, I tried to get both sides to acknowledge the basic
principle that only through speech and dissent could each side present its case. While they
disagreed, I encouraged them to recognize the importance of disagreement while advocating

Sakib Khan
LSAC Account Number: 27019580 Personal Statement pg. 3 of 3
their beliefs. Being able to step outside of my own politics enabled me to enter the middle of the
situation and serve as an intermediary.
However, sometimes even the best of plans falls through. The event was disrupted and I
found myself again in that familiar position—outside of the conflict, yet still in the middle of the
incident. On the stage that night, I requested allies and fellow minority group leaders, some of
them close friends, to desist in their protest and step off the stage. I acted at the request of the
same student group that I felt was deliberately infuriating our community.
University administrators like President Bollinger, Provost Brinkley and Chaplain Davis
understand the balance; my fellow board members on the SGB understand it too. The College
Republicans seem to get it; my friends and allies do not. The fallout of the event has resulted in
strained relationships with my fellow activists. They wonder why I acted on behalf of those
whose views they know I abhor. In experiencing this deeply personal tension, I have developed
a stronger loyalty to the Enlightenment principle that through open and free discourse we build a
better society. Only through an unregulated airing of opposing ideas may we do justice to the
truth and only through an open, fair and public airing of arguments can we do justice to justice.
Political solidarity and beliefs on human and civil rights all take a backseat to this
uncompromising ethos. It is a core part of who I am, and I seek license to ensure and promote it.
It’s why I want to be a lawyer.