Free speech seems to be something of the past. As each day goes by, the First Amendment becomes less of a guaranteed right and more of an aspiration for Americans. However, where we go wrong as Americans is when we view the issue as one-sided or partisan.
When it comes to the First Amendment’s language, Cornell University Law School’s Legal Information Institute says, “The right to freedom of speech allows individuals to express themselves without government interference or regulation.” However, issues can arise when colleges, universities or government bodies craft their own sets of rules, regulating acceptable forms of free speech and expression.
As an example, public universities can “regulate speech through time, place, and manner restrictions.” However, boundaries in place require restrictions to be reasonable, neutral, preventative of disruptions and foster discourse. While hate speech is the likely target of the regulations and restrictions, the basis that speech itself can be restricted is concerning.
What is problematic about this idea is that on college campuses, free speech and freedom of expression are both declining. If they weren’t in decline, measures taken by the government or university administrators to safeguard them would be unheard of and unnecessary. Instead, on Feb. 18, a Yale Law conference reaffirmed institutional backing for academic freedom and free speech on campus. Going back further to 2018, the state of Florida responded to free speech issues by joining 20 other states in proposing their own “Campus Free Expression Act.”
However, one of the most interesting elements of free speech restrictions is self-censorship. Ask yourself right now, have you ever sat in a class and hesitated to share a belief you have?
Free speech is a heavy issue on campuses and look no further than how Fordham University is ranked as number 234 of 251 colleges by the nonpartisan Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression’s (FIRE) “free speech rankings” for 2025. Fordham was also amongst the bottom five of FIRE’s rankings in 2024, mainly for disruptive conduct, holding little tolerance for either liberal or conservative students and having a “below average” speech climate in the classroom. FIRE also lists other examples of free speech restrictions like some public institutions such as the University of South Carolina.
A good explanation for this could come from the same 2024 report from FIRE where 26% of students stated that they feel pressured to avoid discussing difficult topics in class and 56% also expressed their worries about how a misunderstanding could damage their reputation.
The problem of free speech goes beyond higher education as well, as President Donald Trump signed an executive order on his first day in office titled: “Restoring Freedom Of Speech And Ending Federal Censorship.”
Specifically, this order was described to “enshrine the right of the American people to speak freely in the public square without Government interference,” and to “secure the right of the American people to engage in constitutionally protected speech.”
But, a good question to ask is: Why did Trump sign an order on free speech if all Americans already have the right to express themselves freely?
The reason lies in many places, like in present societal concerns over misinformation, but also other concerning examples of free speech issues on campuses. Extraordinary violations, or violations of any sort on campuses, back the necessity for attentiveness to the topic.
This added attentiveness to free speech through the executive order could very well affect colleges and universities as well, mainly because of how institutions in the United States are overseen by the government through the many grants, subsidies or other financial aid that assist college operations. Though not all federal funding pertains to campus operations, if colleges get a single dollar, they are in debt, so to speak, to the government.
Though higher education is not directly mentioned in the order, and it is uncertain if the order will affect colleges and universities; the intention behind the order could be seen as a warning shot to administrators. Take for instance how the the language states that it is aimed to “ensure that no taxpayer resources are used to engage in or facilitate any conduct that would unconstitutionally abridge the free speech of any American citizen.”
Beyond the examples of FIRE’s ranking of colleges and universities, there are recent instances where attempts to have free speech on campuses have been disrupted. One example is how a Turning Point USA speaker event was shut down at the University of Washington last month. In that instance, a protest was organized and turned violent due to how the invited speaker had previously expressed her comments and views about women’s sports. Another example that could be considered is when conservative commentator, Michael Knowles, was interrupted during a speech at the University of Pittsburgh in 2023 by a couple who set off smoke bombs inside of the event.
But free speech is an absolutist topic; it doesn’t only relate to conservatives on college campuses. It applies to every student. A good example of such is the 2024 anti-Israel protests on campuses like Columbia University. At the time, posts on Instagram from Columbia University Apartheid Divest (CUAD), a pro-Palestine student group, led to conversations, concerns and outrage from both sides of the aisle on issues of free speech, expression and demonstrations.
Whether or not we’d like to face it head-on, conservatives, liberals and moderates need to come together to understand that free speech isn’t fully present on college campuses. The simplest way to solve this issue is by doubling down on the idea that free speech and expression cannot be infringed, prohibited or limited.
Michael Duke, GSB ’26, is a business administration major from Scottsdale, Ariz.
