“The first step is to remind our students and colleagues that those who hold views contrary to one’s own are rarely evil or stupid, and may know or understand things that we do not. It is only when we start with this assumption that rational discourse can begin, and that the winds of freedom can blow." – Former Stanford Provost John Etchemendy
FEATURED ITEMS
​
​​
​
​
President Levin’s Opening Remarks to the Faculty Senate (April 10, 2025)
​
“The Labels That Divide Us” (video), Monica Harris, Executive Director of the Foundation Against Intolerance and Racism (FAIR).
​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​
From Our Latest Newsletter​
​
"To Be True To The Best You Know" -- Jane Stanford
​November 10, 2025
The Global Free Speech Recession
Excerpts (links in the original):
. . . .
“The administration’s most alarming actions blur the distinction between protected and unprotected speech as well as words and violence. Right after the Kirk tragedy, Attorney General Pam Bondi said: ‘We will absolutely target you, go after you, if you are targeting anyone with hate speech.’ Bondi later walked this statement back, saying that ‘Hate speech that crosses the line into threats of violence is NOT protected by the First Amendment.’ But since then, the administration has only continued to conflate protected speech with violence....
“There’s little subtlety here. The White House has flagged Americans it considers anti-American, anti-capitalist, or anti-Christian -- none of which the memo defines -- as potential national security threats. The president’s memo asserts a vast left-wing conspiracy to incite political violence and then directs the National Joint Terrorism Task Force and its local offices to ‘investigate all participants in these criminal and terroristic conspiracies.’
“This guilt-by-association tactic is absolutely chilling in a free society....
“Two years ago, The Future of Free Speech, a nonpartisan think tank at Vanderbilt University, released a report, ‘The Free Speech Recession Hits Home.’ The report analyzed free speech developments in 22 democracies between 2015 and 2022. It found something alarming: ‘Over 75 percent of the developments discussed are speech restrictive.’ ..."
[Followed by specific examples around the world.]
Full op-ed by FIRE Vice President Matthew Harwood at Substack and as originally published at Dispatch. For convenience, we also have posted a PDF copy of the Vanderbilt report referenced above, “Mapping Laws and Regulations Affecting Free Speech in 22 Open Democracies” at our Commentary from Others webpage.
Responding to Skepticism in Higher Education
Excerpt (link in the original):
“For months, the biggest headlines from American campuses have centered on legal battles with the Trump administration. These arise, in part, from growing public skepticism (especially, but not exclusively among conservatives) about U.S. campuses.
“Removed from these combative headlines -- and receiving far less attention -- are proactive steps being taken by many universities to get at the heart of concerns felt by many Americans.
“Presidents and senior leaders from nine of America’s private universities gathered on Oct. 7–8 in Washington, D.C., for discussions about what more could be done to ‘model healthy civic life and intellectual exchange’ on U.S. campuses.
“Convened by Jonathan Haidt’s Constructive Dialogue Institute, these universities included Brown University, Dartmouth College, Duke University, Harvard University, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, New York University, Tufts University, Vanderbilt University and Yale University.
“Participants in the two-day summit worked to ‘develop innovative models for strengthening constructive dialogue, open inquiry and free expression in higher education.' ..."
[Followed by examples of actions being taken at various campuses.]
Full article at Deseret News. See also “Refining Trump’s Higher-Education Reform” by Hoover Senior Fellow Peter Berkowitz at Real Clear Politics.
Universities Have a Logic Problem
Excerpts (link in the original):
“There is nothing like political ideology to create difficulties with thinking, and the situation worsens when it is channeled through institutions. Among the most pronounced sources of such difficulties, ironically, is the university....
“While our higher education tradition in America has brought us many successes, it is also creating problems, notably in how we think.
“That may be counterintuitive: On our college campuses, we tend to address what we think are serious problems seriously. In reality, they often become points of disagreement, stemming from differences in perception....
“One of the most reliable places in the university system to locate the logical problem of induction is in our law schools. Law, as practiced in academia, is especially vulnerable to such error because, among other problems, it systematically mixes law and politics as teaching content, thereby portraying law as an instrument of politics—and, by extension, of ideology—and ideology as an instrument of justice." ...
[Followed by specific examples of different faculty approaches.]
Full op-ed at Minding the Campus. See also “Academia Has a Freedom of Speech Problem That Starts with Professors” by Kansas State Prof. Emeritus Dennis Weisman at The Hill.
Faculty Face Widespread Punishment for Speech While Administrators and Unions Stay Silent
Excerpts (link in the original):
“The ideal of academic freedom has always rested on a simple promise: scholars must be free to pursue truth, wherever it leads. But new data from the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE) show how far higher education has drifted from that ideal.
“In FIRE’s latest survey, an astonishing 94 percent of faculty reported suffering some negative consequence for their speech. These range from lost professional relationships (47 percent) and workplace shunning (40 percent) to seeking psychological counseling to cope with the fallout (27 percent) or even losing their jobs (20 percent).
“These are not isolated anecdotes. They describe a profession under siege....
“FIRE’s Sean Stevens put it plainly, stating, ‘Support for academic freedom should never depend on the views being expressed, but our survey shows that’s exactly what’s happening.’ His colleague Nathan Honeycutt added, ‘Cancellation campaigns are often wrapped in the language of preventing emotional harm. But it’s the mobs themselves that inflict lasting mental anguish on academics.’
“That’s the paradox of the modern campus. Speech is punished in the name of compassion. Administrators invoke ‘well-being’ as a justification for silencing, yet it’s dissenters -- not mobs -- who bear the real psychological cost. The result is a culture of timidity that corrodes the mission of higher education."...
Full op-ed by Stanford alum and Sarah Lawrence Prof. Samuel J. Abrams at Minding the Campus.
Other Articles of Interest
Why FIRE Is Now Judging Bias-Reporting Systems More Harshly
Full op-ed by Stanford alum and FIRE CEO Greg Lukianoff at Substack. See also “Stanford’s Program re Bias” at our Stanford Concerns webpage.
A European Threat to the First Amendment
Full op-ed at Law & Liberty.
The Free World Is Losing the Information War; Here’s How It Can Win
Full op-ed at West Point Modern War Institute: “A third of Americans do not believe the media should be able to report news without state censorship.... Nearly one in five believe the NATO alliance is no longer necessary.... At the core of each of these beliefs and many others are disinformation campaigns that overstate the dangers of free speech....”
Samples of Current Teaching, Research and Other Activities at Stanford
Click on each article for direct access; selections are from Stanford Report and other Stanford websites.
Interview of President Emeritus John Hennessy
Debunking Common Free Speech Myths
Academic Integrity Working Group Addresses Generative AI and Exam Policies
Five Things to Know About the Dangers of High Blood Pressure
Is There a Limit to Indoor Nature’s Benefits?
​
**********​​​​​​
“If the rising generation of students is taught, either implicitly or explicitly, to censor themselves or to despise those with different viewpoints, they will act accordingly in the public square after they graduate. But if they’re taught to debate vigorously -- with an exchange of arguments and evidence -- in pursuit of truth instead of victory at all costs, they’ll take that spirit of free speech and mutual respect into the public square.” -- UNC Prof. Jed W. Atkins
Comments and Questions from Our Readers
See more reader comments on our Reader Comments webpage.
Need Dialog, Not Prohibitions
​
I suggest the university produce forums in which ultimate concerns about war and peace presently unfolding be formally debated, subject to the rules of decorum. This is what the university is for, not prohibitions on argument or advocacy. Silence renders learning impossible.
Hoping for Balanced Speech at Stanford
​
I am so in support of the opinions expressed here and hope Stanford will adopt a more balanced approach to free speech. I can only hope.
Teaching Young People and Others How to Disagree Civilly
​
While I believe that supporting free speech is very important in and of itself, I also believe that there is a related component that is often ignored. That component is teaching people, especially young people, how to disagree civilly/how to constructively respond to free speech they might not agree with.
Question About Ties to the Alumni Association
​
Q. I notice that the SAA website contains no links to the Stanford Alumni for Free Speech and Critical Thinking website. Why is that?
A. Our website is not linked at the SAA website since we intentionally did not seek to become an affiliate of SAA. Among other things, we wanted to maintain independence, including since SAA became a subsidiary of
the university in the mid-1990’s. That said, there are a number of current and former Stanford administrators and trustees who receive our Newsletters and read the materials that are posted at the website.
About Us
Member, Alumni Free Speech Alliance
Stanford Alumni for Free Speech and Critical Thinking is an independent, diverse, and nonpartisan group of Stanford alumni committed to promoting and safeguarding freedom of thought and expression, intellectual diversity and inclusion, and academic freedom at Stanford.
​
We believe innovation and positive change for the common good is achieved through free and active discourse from varying viewpoints, the freedom to question both popular and unpopular opinions, and the freedom to seek truth without fear of reprisal from those who disagree, within the confines of humanity and mutual respect.
Our goal is to support students, faculty, administrators, and staff in efforts that assure the Stanford community is truly inclusive as to what can be said in and outside the classroom, the kinds of speakers that can be invited, and what should always be the core principles of a great university like Stanford. We also advocate that Stanford incorporates the Chicago Trifecta, the gold standard for freedom of speech and expression at college and university campuses, and that Stanford abides by these principles in both its policies and its actions.
​