College free speech faces a new threat

Deplatforming attempts now come more from the right

Recent developments mark a significant shift in the forces that threaten free speech on campus. The number of deplatforming attempts — efforts to prevent invited speakers from appearing on campus — has now exceeded 100 for the third consecutive year. This is an unprecedented streak, signaling that the impulse to silence rather than engage controversial voices has become a persistent feature of campus life.

What’s new in 2025 is not just the volume but the direction of these deplatforming attempts. For the first time since 2015, more deplatforming efforts have come from the right of the expression rather than from the left — and the difference isn’t even close: The number from the right (75) is almost double the number from the left (39).

In 2025, conservative actors are increasingly organizing and pressuring institutions to cancel events, disinvite speakers, or punish expression they find objectionable — particularly in response to speech seen as critical of Israel, supportive of DEI efforts, or perceived as celebrating or justifying Charlie Kirk’s assassination.

Students and student organizations have also faced heightened scrutiny. So far this year, there have been roughly 200 documented attempts to sanction students or student groups for speech-related activities. These efforts range from disciplinary actions for protests and social media posts to revoking funding for student organizations based on the content of their events or political positions.

While some of these actions originate within institutions, many are spurred by external pressure, including alumni groups, media campaigns, and political figures. The net effect is a campus climate where students may feel increasingly uncertain about which forms of expression are protected and which ones might provoke severe consequences.

Finally, as we’ve previously noted, attempts to sanction scholars have reached record highs, underscoring growing tension between higher education and political forces. What’s particularly striking is that many of these efforts are being spearheaded by government actors, both at the state and federal levels. Legislators and public officials are increasingly targeting faculty members for speech they deem controversial or politically charged, often under the guise of combating bias.

These interventions are not isolated. They reflect a broader trend of state involvement in academic discourse, raising serious concerns about the erosion of institutional autonomy and the potential chilling effect on scholarly research and classroom dialogue.

Campus tolerance for free speech is tanking

To be clear, not all challenges to speech are unjustified. Universities must balance open dialogue with community standards, safety concerns, and legal obligations. But the scale and source of recent efforts to control speech, particularly those led by government officials, raise urgent questions about the future of academic freedom and the role of universities as spaces for open inquiry.

As campuses navigate these pressures, the need for principled leadership has never been greater. Defending speech — even speech we disagree with — is not a partisan act. It’s a foundational principle of higher education. In a year defined by escalating attempts to silence students, faculty, and outside voices, recommitting to that principle is essential.