What the Brown University and MIT Shootings Could Mean for Institutional Liability — A Legal Perspective

In December 2025, Brown University and the surrounding community were shaken by a devastating act of violence that left two Brown students dead and nine others injured during a mass shooting at the Barus and Holley Engineering Building on the Providence campus. Two days later, authorities tied the same suspect to the fatal shooting of a distinguished MIT professor at his home in Brookline, Massachusetts — an event that sent shockwaves through both academic communities. 

The suspect — Cláudio Manuel Neves Valente, a former Brown physics graduate student — embarked on a shooting spree that began inside an undergraduate lecture hall and culminated in a separate killing in Brookline before he was found dead in a New Hampshire storage unit after a multi-day manhunt.

What Happened: A Summary of the Facts

On December 13, 2025, the gunman entered the Barus and Holley building during a crowded exam-period review session, opened fire, and fled the scene before police arrived. Two students were killed instantly and nine others were wounded. 

In the immediate aftermath, Brown University faced intense scrutiny over the lack of detailed surveillance video from inside the building, issues with building access protocols, and delays in issuing campus alerts.

Subsequent news reporting and investigations revealed that portions of the Barus and Holley Building lacked internal cameras at the time of the attack, a decision justified by the university in part as the building’s “older” section having limited coverage despite the campus overall having over 1,200 cameras. WJAR Public safety critics and federal reviewers have also raised questions about Brown’s emergency notification systems and the speed with which they were used. Reuters

Legal Exposure: Could Brown University Be Held Liable?

Universities have a duty of care to maintain reasonably safe environments for students and faculty. In the context of campus shootings, this duty can encompass physical security (such as surveillance and access control), timely emergency communication, and appropriately trained public safety personnel.

Here are a few key legal concepts that may play out:

1. Failure to Maintain Reasonable Security

If evidence shows that Brown had actual or constructive knowledge of risks and failed to act, plaintiffs could argue that the university breached its duty of care. For example:

• Lack of Cameras/Internal Surveillance: The absence of cameras or blind spots in the building where the shooting occurred may be viewed as a failure to take reasonable security measures. WJAR
• Building Access Controls: Reports indicate that certain doors and spaces were widely accessible during peak hours, potentially permitting an assailant to enter and exit without significant barriers. Facilities Dive

2. Delayed Emergency Notification

Years of campus safety law and litigation emphasize timely warnings for imminent threats. Questions about whether Brown’s alert systems were deployed quickly and effectively — or whether they complied fully with federal requirements — are already drawing scrutiny from the U.S. Department of Education’s Office of Federal Student Aid under the Clery Act. NBC Boston

3. Actual or Constructive Notice of Risk

News reports suggest that a Brown custodian and others observed the suspect’s suspicious behavior in the weeks prior to the shooting, potentially creating an argument that Brown had constructive notice of risk but did not take adequate steps. 

Subsequent Remedial Measures and Their Impact

Subsequent remedial measures — improvements made after an incident (like adding more cameras or shoring up alert systems) — are generally inadmissible at trial to prove negligence or culpability under most civil rules (e.g., Federal Rule of Evidence 407). However, such measures can be admissible for other purposes (e.g., ownership, feasibility, or witness credibility); and Rhode Island Rules of Civil Procedure do allow them at times to be used as an inference of prior negligence. It will be interesting to see how Brown handles changes that it most certainly will make with adding surveillance and varying security protocols and how that could impact the impending litigation that’s almost certainly to arise due to this terrible and unfortunate circumstance.

Settlement Likelihood: Early Expectations

Given the severity of the tragedy — multiple fatalities and high-profile victims — it would not be surprising if Brown University and prospective claimants pursue a prompt negotiated resolution rather than protracted litigation. There are several reasons:

• High Human Stakes: Families who lost loved ones will likely seek full compensation without enduring long trials.
• Institutional Reputation: Universities often choose early settlement to minimize prolonged negative publicity and community disruption.
• Insurance Considerations: Institutional liability policies often incentivize early resolution when exposures are clear and damages substantial.

Brown’s Legal Strategy and Representation

Brown University has already retained experienced outside counsel — including former U.S. Attorney Zachary Cunha — to help coordinate legal response efforts, assist with compliance inquiries, and manage potential litigation. The Washington Post Early engagement of high-level counsel is consistent with an expectation that claims will be asserted and that institutionally coordinated defense and settlement strategy will be important.

In Closing

The Brown and MIT shootings are heartbreaking tragedies that raise critical questions about campus safety, emergency preparedness, and institutional responsibility. From a legal standpoint, whether Brown University faces successful claims will turn on nuanced questions about what it knew, what it should have anticipated, and the reasonableness of its existing safety practices.

What is clear already — both in public reporting and in legal developments — is that Brown’s emergency response and security systems will be examined under regulatory and civil lenses alike, and that any resolution will profoundly impact how universities nationwide think about preventing and responding to acts of violence.