Table of Contents
Article Highlights Partisanship of Campus Speech Codes
Former ݮƵAPP president David French has an on speech codes on today. He explains the “mental agility” of the 1960s free speech activists who have become the architects of today’s campus speech codes. David writes:
Those who formerly glorified dissent clamp down on campus with a mind-numbing level of intellectual conformity. Scientific inquiry is welcome, unless it results in tough questions about possible innate gender differences. Open debate is the hallmark of the academy, unless of course that debate intrudes into areas where policy should be settled and morality decided (like when dealing with race, class, gender, war, peace, and sexuality).
FIRE exists to counteract this suppression of dissent and to “defend and sustain individual rights on America’s increasingly repressive and partisan colleges and universities.” From College Republicans holding affirmative action bake sales to PETA groups tabling the campus quad, we will protect everyone’s freedom of speech, freedom of religion, freedom of conscience, and due process rights no matter where they land on the political spectrum.
Recent Articles
FIRE’s award-winning Newsdesk covers the free speech news you need to stay informed.
Speech is not a crime — even if it complicates ICE’s job
Aaron Terr explains why alerting others to law enforcement activity, or reporting on it, is protected by the First Amendment.
ݮƵAPP amicus brief: First Amendment bars using schoolkid standards to silence parents' speech
School officials ousted parents for protesting a trans athlete by wearing pink XX wristbands at a soccer game. ݮƵAPP explains how the court's decision got things wrong.
Trump's $16M win over '60 Minutes' edit sends chilling message to journalists everywhere
Trump's $16M win over a "60 Minutes" edit sends a chilling message to journalists everywhere. ݮƵAPP’s Bob Corn-Revere calls it what it is: the FCC playing politics.
To speak or not to speak: Universities face the Kalven question
As political pressure mounts, Dinah Megibow-Taylor explores whether recent institutional statements defend academic freedom — or quietly erode it.