National Free Speech News & Commentary

Coleman Hughes
The Free Press

Excerpt: Like any young writer, I am well aware that an invitation to speak at TED can be a career-changing opportunity. So you can imagine how thrilled I was when I was invited to appear at this year’s annual conference. What I could not have imagined from an organization whose tagline is “ideas worth spreading” is that it would attempt to suppress my own.

According to its website, TED’s mission is to “discover and spread ideas that spark imagination, embrace possibility, and catalyze impact.” They claim to be “devoted to curiosity, reason, wonder, and the pursuit of knowledge—without an agenda.” My experience suggests otherwise, with TED falling far short of those ambitions and instead displaying all the hallmarks of an institution captured by the new progressive orthodoxy.

Heterodox Academy Panel Discussion, Wednesday, September 27, 4pm ET

Excerpt: Many colleges and universities are taking, or re-stating, official positions and principles on issues of open inquiry and free expression on campus – sometimes in response to external pressure, or through influence from varying campus groups.

What does this trend tell us, if anything, about the direction of higher education? Are official statements just cheap lip service? Or is this a moment for faculty to organize on campus to create positive change – and if so, what might that look like?

Dan McLaughlin
National Review

Excerpt: One case that isn’t quite ready to be considered Tuesday, but could intrigue the justices, is Speech First, Inc. v. Sands (No. 23-156), which challenges campus speech codes. The case comes from a divided panel decision of the Fourth Circuit, which rejected challenges to two Virginia Tech campus speech policies.

Virginia Tech has backed off the policy since the suit was filed. FIRE also notes that “time and time again, [it] has seen universities revise unconstitutional policies, only to bring them back when there is employee or state government turnover.” Given the widespread use of such policies and the open circuit split on their legality, it would seem a fit time for the Court to get involved.

Quin Hillyer
Washington Examiner

Excerpt: A new survey sponsored by Yale University’s Buckley Institute shows again that disturbing majorities of college students have no appreciation for liberty and, worse, that they can’t even think logically.

This year, for the first time in the nine years of the survey, a plurality agrees it’s OK to shout down a speaker (with another 10% not willing to rule it out). For the first time ever, an outright majority, 51% to 38%, favors “speech codes” to regulate expression on campus.

Kristen Shahverdian, Samantha LaFrance
PEN America

Excerpt: Earlier this month, when disability activist Alice Wong submitted her remarks for a virtual talk at Boston University’s School of Public Health, the school made an unusual request: to change what she planned to say.

Because she cannot speak, Wong requires questions in advance of public appearances. This allows her to type answers ahead of time to more efficiently use a text-to-speech app. Days before the scheduled talk, a school official wrote to Wong, asking that she change “F U Dr. Fauci” to “I disagree with Dr. Fauci” and to remove the names of the other officials. In doing so, the school inadvertently transformed a simple accessibility request into an opportunity to muffle the activist’s speech.

Audie Cornish
The Assignment With Audie Cornish Podcast

Excerpt: Between student protests, controversial speakers, and debates over “safe spaces,” complaints about free speech on campus are louder than ever. How do school leaders respond to these gripes? And how do they balance freedom of expression – and the idea that speech can be violence?

We have two college presidents from the front lines of this debate: Roslyn Clark Artis of Benedict College and Michael Roth of Wesleyan University. Both schools are part of the so-called “Campus Call for Free Expression.”