Search

John Warner
Inside Higher Ed

Excerpt: There are a number of recent stories about political acts that are direct attacks on how higher ed institutions operate that have me worried because they lack contemporary precedent.

Consider the gap between a board dedicated to overseeing the health and well-being of the institution and one specifically dedicated to “controlling” the institution, apparently on behalf of the state’s chief executive. Oversight and control are two very different things.

Ryan Quinn
Inside Higher Ed

Excerpt: Over the past two years, lawmakers in at least 10 states have pushed legislation that would weaken—or outright eliminate—tenure in public colleges and universities. With the exception of a Democratic state senator in Hawai’i, these bills have all been pushed by Republicans in states such as Texas where the party controls the Legislature.

Despite these proposals, no state has actually gone through with fully banning tenure from its public colleges and universities. The bills that would’ve done so either failed to pass or were watered down before passage after facing opposition from faculty members, who stress that tenure protects academic freedom, including for conservatives, and from university leaders, who say it helps recruit professors who could make more outside academe.

Sam Kahn
Persuasion

Excerpt: The Court has ruled, the results are in, and what we are left with is… the worst of all possible worlds.

In Moody v. NetChoice/NetChoice v. Paxton, the Court espoused a doctrine in which social media companies are viewed as curators or compilers of online material, with the feed constituting a “distinctive expressive offering”—even when those curatorial choices are in fact made by algorithms or AI tools. That philosophy gives the social media companies carte blanche to moderate—or censor—as they wish. Meanwhile, in the highly consequential case Murthy v. Missouri, the Court found that plaintiffs lacked standing to sue the government even when the government had copiously interfered in tech companies’ moderation practices.

Jonathan Zimmerman
Philadelphia Inquirer

Excerpt: How should schools regulate what students post on the internet?
I don’t know. But here’s what I do know: We’ll never craft good policies around online student speech unless we listen to what students have to say.

That’s been the missing voice in the controversy in Great Valley, a Chester County school district where middle school students made 22 TikTok accounts impersonating their teachers. Some of the fake videos were truly horrible, casting the teachers as pedophiles or depicting them in sexual encounters with each other.

Eliot A. Cohen
The Atlantic

Excerpt: After 42 years of academic life—not counting five years spent getting a Ph.D.—I am hanging it up. A while back, I concluded that the conversation that I would most dread overhearing would be an alumna saying to a current student, “I know, I know, but you should have seen the old man in his prime.” I believe I dodged that one.

Maggie Hicks
Chronicle of Higher Education

Excerpt: This month, Raz Segal learned that he’d been offered a job to run the Center for Holocaust and Genocide Studies at the University of Minnesota’s flagship. It was an exciting career move for Segal, an associate professor of Holocaust and genocide studies at Stockton University.

Five days later, Minnesota withdrew the offer. The problem, according to key players involved in the search, was Segal’s opinion of the Israel-Hamas war — namely an October 13 article he wrote arguing that Israel’s ongoing attacks on the Gaza strip were a “textbook case of genocide.”

Brian Rosenberg
Chronicle of Higher Education

Excerpt: I suspect that I am not the only former college president who has experienced a mild bout of PTSD during the past several months, as the frequency, intensity, and visibility of attacks on presidents have increased to a level that would have been difficult to imagine even on my worst days.

Bill Hewitt
Princeton Alumni Weekly

Excerpt: Complicity in the wrongful shedding of blood was the theme to the disruptions of President Eisgruber’s address at Alexander Hall and recent landmark vandalisms. This raises, with apology to Florence Reece and her 1930s protest song “Which Side Are You On,” the question, “Which ‘genocide’ are you on?”  

In their zeal to be pro-Palestinian and their efforts to depict Israel’s efforts of self-defense as “genocide,” PIAD and SJP brazenly ignore Hamas’ goal and actions to annihilate Israel. Symbolically raising their red hands of protest against Israel’s actions, these PIAD and SJP protesters stand morally submerged in the blood Hamas wrongfully sheds.

Leigh Revers
Heterodox STEM

Excerpt: Diversity, equity and inclusion: unless you have been hiding in some ideological ‘safe space’ expunged of today’s wokery —and let’s face it, where in Canada would that be?— these three ubiquitous terms will be instantly familiar to everyone who happens to work in an organization or institution in Canada, whether public or private.

Sean Stevens
Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression

Excerpt: The second edition of the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression’s National Speech Index, released today, finds that both liberals and conservatives are concerned about the future of freedom of speech in the country, regardless of which major party candidate wins the presidential election in November.

The survey also finds that this is where the agreement ends. There are stark differences between liberals and conservatives on the state of freedom of speech in America today and on how often they think colleges and universities should take positions on political issues.

PFS found this video on May 2; it was filmed on April 23
Video filmed at London’s Conway Hall
Niall Ferguson
 
Excerpt:  I know these words sound nice and nobody wants to be against them, but I have to tell you that in George Orwell’s 1984, words mean the opposite of what they appear to mean.
 
What diversity, equity, inclusion turned out to mean at Harvard was uniformity of thought, no equity, no due process for anybody who fell foul of the inquisition, and exclusion of conservatives and indeed anybody who is deemed to be too far to the right, including classical liberals.”

Ted Balaker
The Coddling of the American Mind Movie, Substack

Excerpt: Most of our “DVD extras” are paywalled, but we’re making this one available to everyone. In it, Jonathan Haidt touches on the role universities, specifically administrators, play in encouraging students to think in binary terms, to see the world as battle between good and evil.

Jon references the work of Samuel Abrams, a professor at Sarah Lawrence College. Abrams conducted a national survey of college administrators who work directly with students. He found that “liberal staff members outnumber their conservative counterparts by the astonishing ratio of 12-to-one.” That makes administrators the most left-lopsided group on campus

Will Bardenwerper
Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

Excerpt: The article was so bizarre I thought it might be an April Fool’s hoax, given the April 1 byline. The author of “We must not let eating clubs be ideological safe spaces” in The Daily Princetonian had invited a prominent Princeton professor to join him as a guest for lunch at his “eating club” (essentially a private club serving as hybrid dining hall and fraternity/sorority for Princeton juniors and seniors). He later learned that a “group of membership” felt “caught off guard” when they saw the professor, and they were deeply upset by his presence.

If our future leaders are coddled to the point that they cannot share a dining room with an accomplished professor with whom they disagree, where does that leave us as a country? What good comes from four years spent reinforcing the ideas one arrived on campus with?

Jenna Silber Storey and Benjamin Storey
Inside Higher Ed

Excerpt: Universities today feel understandably besieged. State legislators are intervening in curricular debates, members of Congress are taking aim at university presidents, and public support for college is at historic lows. Because criticism of the university from the outside comes most intensely from the right, and professors and administrators on the inside are mostly on the left, it is natural for insiders to respond to external critics by appealing to partisan passions, summoning one another to the barricades, and attempting to repel the barbarian onslaught.

Dialogue Vanderbilt, Vanderbilt University

Excerpt: From our beginning, we’ve believed in the power of bringing together people of differing viewpoints for a common purpose. A long-standing commitment to free expression is fundamental to who we are.

At Vanderbilt, we have a long tradition of free expression. At a moment when free expression on college campuses and in American civic life is at risk, we are proud to affirm our commitment to this core principle.

Greg Lukianoff
The Eternally Radical Idea, Substack

Excerpt: About a decade ago, I had a weird idea. At the time, I had for 13 years defended free speech and academic freedom in higher education at FIRE — then the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education, now and Expression — but something began to change around 2014. There was a sudden surge in attempts to deplatform speakers, and students were arriving on campus requesting things I’d never heard of, like “trigger warnings,” “safe spaces,” and the policing of “microaggressions.”

I was developing a theory about what happened, but I wanted to talk it through with someone knowledgeable. That’s when I asked Jonathan Haidt out to lunch to discuss it. Jon is a world-renowned social psychologist and professor at New York University. We met at an Indian restaurant near his campus, and I started to lay out my thoughts. What followed was the beginning of a working relationship and friendship that continues to this day.

Rita Koganzon
Hedgehog Review

Excerpt: When I was a graduate teaching assistant at Harvard University a decade ago, one of my students missed a final exam because he forgot to set his alarm. I didn’t learn about this because he told me, in person or even by email; nor did he apologize for his oversight or ask if he could make up the exam. Instead, in the manner customary at Harvard, I was informed by a message from his “Residential Dean,” a faculty member living in the dorms whose job was to liaise between delinquent students and their professors, in part by composing their excuses for them.

This is not some recent, overzealous response to the outsized demands of student activists; it is, rather, an old model that Harvard and only a few other very selective colleges have long followed, but which other schools all over the country now strive to imitate.

Maggie Hicks
The Chronicle of Higher Education

Excerpt: When Kenneth Stern drafted the working definition of antisemitism 20 years ago as director of the antisemitism division for the American Jewish Committee, he wanted to help researchers better understand the frequency of violence targeted at Jewish communities.

Stern, who is now the director of the Bard Center for the Study of Hate, is alarmed by its use on college campuses. He believes colleges and politicians who adopt his definition into antidiscrimination policies could then censor anyone who criticizes or says something controversial about Israel. While the definition itself should help people identify clear harassment, using it in legislation allows colleges and lawmakers to clamp down on any protected speech, no matter if it’s harmful or offensive, Stern says.

Ilya Somin
The Volokh Conspiracy, Reason Magazine

Excerpt: Notre Dame law Professor Derek Muller—a leading election law scholar—has posted a study he conducted of the partisan distribution of political donations by law professors between 2017 and 2023. Not surprisingly, they skew overwhelmingly towards Democratic candidates.

The overall result here is far from surprising. Lots of previous studies find that law professors are skew towards the political left. Still, the extent of the imbalance is notable. Exclusively Democratic contributors outnumber exclusively Republican ones by over 35 to 1. That's a larger disproportion than in previous studies.

Emily Nayyer, Sean Stevens
Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression

Excerpt: Cancel Culture is getting worse. As FIRE President and CEO Greg Lukianoff has pointed out many times, more college faculty have been fired during the nine-and-a-half years (and counting) of Cancel Culture, which FIRE defines as roughly starting in 2014 and accelerating past 2017, than lost their jobs during the Red Scare of the 1950s. But who is driving this anti-speech trend on college campuses?

One recent study has pinned the blame on older faculty, but FIRE has its doubts.

Francesca Block
The Free Press

Excerpt: An activist group in California has paid nearly 100 public high schoolers $1,400 each to learn how to fight for racial and social justice, The Free Press has learned.

Contracts between Long Beach Unified School District and Californians for Justice from 2019 to 2023, exclusively obtained by The Free Press, show the school district used taxpayer funds to pay the group nearly $2 million to facilitate equity and leadership development training for students and teachers. In addition to the student stipends, the contracts also allocated a total of $20,200 to 13 parents for participating in the group’s programs.

Yascha Mounk
The Good Fight Podcast, Persuasion, Substack

Excerpt: Larry Summers is an economist, the Charles W. Eliot University Professor and director of the Mossavar-Rahmani Center for Business and Government at Harvard Kennedy School, and a member of the board of directors of OpenAI. Summers is the former President of Harvard University, the former Secretary of the Treasury under Bill Clinton, and was a director of the National Economic Council under Barack Obama.

In this week’s conversation, Yascha Mounk and Larry Summers discuss how universities can re-commit to pursuing truth and protecting academic freedom; how current economic indicators contrast with how many people actually experience the economy; and how Biden can improve his odds for re-election.

Elizabeth Nolan Brown
Reason Magazine

Excerpt: State lawmakers are getting creative in their attempts to control what young people read. Across the U.S., we're seeing legislation aimed at school materials and public libraries.

These measures often wear the mantle of "parental rights" or "protecting kids" from obscenity. But in practice they tend to take aim at any books depicting sex or sexuality. These aren't outright book bans. But they still strike at the heart of things like student privacy and academic freedom, giving the most conservative parents, politicians, or administrators the power to determine what anyone can access of offer at public institutions.

Jonathan Marks
The UnPopulist

Excerpt: No organization defends free speech on American college campuses more effectively than the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE). It fights not only in the court of public opinion but also in real courts.

Challenging serious free speech abrogations on campuses is a worthy goal. But overstating the extent of repression on campus, as FIRE’s CEO and president Greg Lukianoff does in a recent article in the Atlantic, undermines that cause.

Pippa Norris
Harvard Crimson

Excerpt: The animus for much of the recent debate roiling Harvard is the claim that the liberal tilt of the academy has accelerated in recent years. This process is believed to have excluded heterodox voices and thereby restricted academic freedom of expression on college campuses.

Is there solid evidence that viewpoint diversity has indeed worsened over time in academia, as widely assumed? A 2023 survey I helped conduct with The World of Political Science monitored the economic and social ideological values of political scientists, as well as their attitudes towards academic freedom of expression and perceptions of cancel culture. Focusing upon a subset of respondents living and working in western universities and colleges, cohort analysis by decade of birth is a technique which can provide proxy insights into trends over time.

Deborah Gerhardt
Inside Higher Ed

Excerpt: It’s been a challenging time for Jewish students and faculty across our nation. Antisemitic incidents on campuses have increased; protesters we encounter on our paths to class chant hateful words or tear down notices about Israeli hostages, students disrupt speakers instead of listening, and faculty members worry we may find antisemitic greetings on the whiteboards in our classrooms. It can be hard to see where to find a friend or ally.

Jews are tough. The need to hide or flee to escape hatred has plagued us historically. But living with socially acceptable hate among those we thought shared our values— taking punch after punch when we’re already licking painful wounds—is new for many of us.

Hank Reichman
Academe Blog

Excerpt: Today the New York Times published an article recounting the continuing struggle at Barnard College, the women’s college of Columbia University in New York, over the academic freedom and free speech rights of faculty and students.  

While perhaps more draconian than some, the Barnard measures are, unfortunately, just one example of a broad assault on academic freedom and campus free speech focused at the moment on pro-Palestinian expression that some may construe as antisemitic (but not all Jewish scholars do; see, for example, here).  That assault, however, will have an impact on more than expression concerning the current Mideast morass.  Well before October 7, many university administrations sought to curb faculty and student expression that they fear may alienate important external players: trustees, alumni, donors, or politicians.

Greg Lukianoff
The Eternally Radical Idea

Excerpt: ACLU National Legal Director David Cole has a review of my and Rikki Schlott’s book, “The Canceling of the American Mind,” coming out in the February 8 edition of the New York Review of Books. Overall I thought it was quite positive, but Cole made some arguments — which we actually hear quite often — that I think need addressing.

I always welcome good-faith pushback — especially when it gives me an opportunity to go into more depth on why Rikki and I are so concerned about the current situation in higher education. All that said, here are some quotes from Cole’s review that I’d like to respond to.

Vanderbilt University News

Excerpt: Jonathan Rauch, a distinguished Senior Fellow in Governance Studies at The Brookings Institution, will visit Vanderbilt as an Open Dialogue Visiting Fellow for a discussion on Jan. 22. The event, “Why Free Speech Is the Only Safe Space for Minorities,” promises a thought-provoking exploration of the crucial role free speech plays in safeguarding the interests of minorities and fostering inclusivity and understanding within society.

Walter M. Kimbrough
Inside Higher Ed

Excerpt: The past three months have been interesting for higher education. The Hamas attack; the protests on college campuses and elsewhere; the high-profile congressional hearing where three inexperienced presidents faced withering, partisan attacks; and now the resignation of two of three of those presidents.

While there has been plenty of commentary about the backlash against Gay, the ensuring plagiarism allegations and her resignation last week from the Harvard presidency, I have been wrestling with a broader idea. What was the context?

Robert Corn-Revere
Reason Magazine

Excerpt:  Freedom of speech on American college campuses is now facing great challenges in the aftermath of the October 7 Hamas attacks on Israel and Israel's bombardment of Gaza. According to some, the outpouring of ugly, inexplicable, and vituperative speech unleashed by these events means that now is the time to abandon the concept of free speech at our universities. Apparently, to these "sunshine constitutional scholars," speech can only be free if it is polite and unchallenging.

There is no need to infantilize students by telling them they are simply too brittle to fully participate in the heated debates going on in the world around them. Instead, we need clear leadership from university presidents and others that stresses our commitment to free expression. This commitment must remain strong especially in turbulent times.

David From
The Atlantic

Excerpt: Yesterday, the presidents of Harvard, the University of Pennsylvania, and MIT were caught in a trap in front of a House committee. Each was asked whether calling for the genocide of Jews violated rules at their university. Each president refused to answer directly, insisting that everything depends on context.

So here’s the context: On university campuses and in many other places, anti-Semitic speech regularly crosses the line into threats, intimidation, and outright violence against Jews. University rules and local laws are intentionally violated because everybody knows that the rules and laws are selectively enforced.

Kathryn Palmer
Inside Higher Ed

Excerpt: A documentary about two young Jewish Americans who question their loyalty to Israel after traveling to the country and the West Bank has become a flash point in the academic freedom debates consuming some college campuses amid the Israel-Hamas war.

The award-winning film, Israelism, debuted at a film festival earlier this year and more than 60 screenings of it were planned—many on college campuses—across the country this fall and winter. Most of the screenings so far have happened without incident, but at Hunter College in New York and the University of Pennsylvania, the documentary has been the source of controversy over the past month.

Bret Stephens
New York Times

Excerpt: There used to be a sign (which, for all I know, is still there) somewhere in the C.I.A.’s headquarters that read, “Every day is Sept. 12.” It was placed there to remind the agency’s staffers that what they felt right after the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001 — the sense of outrage and purpose, of favoring initiative over caution, of taking nothing for granted — had to be the mind-set with which they arrived to work every day.

Eugene Volokh
Volokh Conspiracy, Reason Magazine

Excerpt: Newsweek (Matthew Impelli) reported today on this incident, which involved "a graduate student" instructor "at UC Berkeley's Department of Ethnic Studies." (The story may have been first broken by Israelly Cool [David Lange].) Fortunately, UC Berkeley promptly rejected this; when I e-mailed the media relations office, I was informed that:

“As soon as the administration was made aware of the assignment it moved quickly to ensure that it would be changed. The situation has been remedied, the assignment has been changed and there are now a number of options for extra credit, not just one.”

By Danielle Shapiro and Yonah Berenson
Wall Street Journal

Excerpt: As college campuses erupted in support of Hamas’s atrocities, many administrators responded equivocally. Often they took refuge in the principles of free speech and institutional neutrality, saying universities have no business taking positions on controversial issues. That would have been convincing if they had adhered to those principles before this month, but many didn’t. Officials often took strong positions on far less significant and more debatable issues. This politicization set the stage for the morally and intellectually bankrupt protests that have caused administrators such embarrassment.

Lauren Noble
National Review

Excerpt: Even at Yale, it is not every day that a faculty member expresses “solidarity” — and apparent glee — over the murder, rape, and kidnapping of civilians. So it did not go unnoticed when, as Israel was reeling from the deadliest terror attack in its history, associate professor Zareena Grewal proclaimed on X that “Palestinians have every right to resist through armed struggle” against a “genocidal settler state.” She also circulated a video of the onslaught captioned, “It’s been such an extraordinary day!”

Over 50,000 people subsequently signed a petition calling on Yale to fire Grewal for her support of terrorism. The university responded quickly, declining to discipline Grewal based on its commitment to freedom of speech. Anyone who has followed headlines about Yale over the past decade may be understandably surprised to learn that the university has such principles.

Ryan Quinn
Inside Higher Ed

Excerpt: Two associates of the right-wing organization Turning Point USA followed a queer Arizona State University instructor on campus Wednesday afternoon, with one demanding he answer questions about “How long you’ve been attracted to minors” and “How long you’ve fantasized about minors having sex with adults” while the other filmed the encounter.

The confrontation eventually turned physical, ending with the educator, David Boyles, posting a photo of himself with blood on one side of his face.

Yascha Mounk
Persuasion

Excerpt: On October 7th, the world witnessed the worst slaughter of Jews since the Holocaust. Many people, of all faiths and convictions, have recognized the enormity of these crimes. Numerous world leaders denounced the terrorist attacks in clear language. Private citizens shared their grief on social media. Millions mourned. But despite the outpouring of support, there has also been a large contingent of people and organizations who stayed uncharacteristically silent—or went so far as to celebrate the carnage.

Some of the most famous universities in the world—including Princeton, Yale and Stanford—only released statements after they came under intense pressure on social media.

Nathan Goetting
Discourse

Excerpt: The current academic free speech crisis stems from two causes. The first is that free speech principles are unnatural and counterintuitive. This has always been the case and, given human nature, always will be. The second, addressed in the next article in this series, is that now young people are exhorting—demanding, even—that older generations use a heavy censorial hand to promote social and political goals. This is unprecedented in our history and, without immediate and significant action, may prove ruinous to the mission of higher education.

Eli Meyerhoff and Isaac Kamola
Academe Blog

Excerpt: Today, attacks on academic freedom originate from state houses, governors’ offices, partisan political organizations, think tanks, and online trolls. This multi-pronged attack on academic freedom requires a mass political—rather than a merely individual, institutional, or procedural—response.

We question whether the language of academic freedom provides the strongest framework for a successful mass defense against this political onslaught. We suggest that an alternative, complementary principle, “freedom to learn,” offers a more widely resonant rallying cry.

Bryan Paul
Washington Examiner

Excerpt: When thinking of college alumni, one generally imagines boosters donning their alma mater’s signature colors and cheering proudly for their team at homecoming games, or a multimillionaire being courted at campus events and donating substantial sums to fund an institution’s new building, sports complex, or scholarship program.

Stanford Alumni for Free Speech and Critical Thinking Newsletter

Excerpt: One of our readers forwarded to us Cornell President Martha E. Pollack’s letter last week welcoming students and faculty back to campus. The letter focuses on the issues of freedom of expression and critical thinking in ways we would hope Stanford’s new leadership can similarly express and then implement this coming academic year. The text of the entire letter is posted at our website.

All indications are that this coming academic year will see a robust discussion nationwide, both on and off campus, about the importance of free speech and academic freedom at our U.S. colleges and universities and, if any restrictions are to be imposed, who gets to decide and why?

Debra Satz and Dan Edelstein
New York Times

Excerpt: Free speech is once again a flashpoint on college campuses. This year has seen at least 20 instances in which students or faculty members attempted to rescind invitations or to silence speakers. In March, law school students at our own institution made national news when they shouted down a conservative federal judge, Kyle Duncan. And by signing legislation that undermines academic freedom in Florida, Gov. Ron DeSantis is carrying out what is effectively a broad assault against higher education.

We believe that this intolerance of ideas is not just a consequence of an increasingly polarized society. We think it also results from the failure of higher education to provide students with the kind of shared intellectual framework that we call “civic education.”

Denise Valenti
Princeton Office of Communications

Excerpt: Anthony Romero was once a Princeton undergraduate struggling with how to confront hurtful speech he experienced on campus. Today, as executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union, he zealously defends Americans’ right to use that same kind of speech.

Romero traced his journey during an Orientation event on Tuesday for first-year students where he joined President Christopher L. Eisgruber to explore the importance of academic freedom and free expression on campus. The event marked the second consecutive year Eisgruber has led an Orientation session on the topic.

Eric Rasmusen, Indiana University professor

Excerpt: Suppose a university has an online form where anyone can report something a student says in private conversation and the report goes into a special surveillance software database that the university bought from the Maxient company for that purpose. A Bias Response Team receives notice of the report, and sees that it is political speech protected by the First Amendment. The Team leaves the report in the student’s file, and asks the student to come to a voluntary meeting. Virginia Tech’s policy in a case like this was to: Invite them to engage in a voluntary conversation. . . . If a student fails to respond to this message, or declines to meet with our office, no further action is taken and the student faces no consequences of any kind.

Would such a bias response apparatus chill speech at the university? Speech First and three circuits say yes; Virginia Tech (Sands) and two circuits say no. Surveillance software is part of that, since they are what bias response teams rely upon, including the BIRT’s at Virginia Tech. Speech First’s cert petition [for Supreme Court review] says, “Precisely because speech codes are often struck down, universities have looked for subtler, more sophisticated ways to chill ‘offensive’ speech.”

Alex Morey
Persuasion

Excerpt: Joy Alonzo wants to stop fentanyl overdose deaths. As a professor at the Texas A&M College of Pharmacy and co-chair of the school’s Opioid Task Force, she advocates for her views inside and outside of class.

Doing so in one of her classes earlier this semester almost cost Alonzo her job.