College leaders are wrestling with whether, when and how to make public statements on contentious political events, panels and reporting show. Administrators described a rising demand from stakeholders to take visible positions on matters ranging from local protests to national policy; some presidents say institutional neutrality remains essential to protect academic debate, while others argue principled statements are necessary to defend campus communities. Panelists recommended reticence paired with mission‑based clarity: speak rarely but plainly, prioritize institutional obligations to safety and academic freedom, and use statements to defend process rather than to take sides. The debate comes as universities face intensified external scrutiny over campus speech, foreign donations, and research agendas — pressures that complicate leaders’ calculus. The guidance underscores the operational risk of public statements and the need for careful stakeholder mapping; boards and general counsels are increasingly involved in communications and legal risk assessments before presidents issue public remarks.