Free Speech at American Universities 60 Years After the Free Speech Movement
On a recent evening at the University of California, Berkeley, a panel gathered to celebrate the 60th anniversary of the historic Free Speech Movement. The event featured legal scholars Nadine Strossen, former president of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), and Erwin Chemerinsky, Dean of the UC Berkeley School of Law. The discussion, moderated by Julia Schaletzky, co-chair of Heterodox Academy in Berkeley, addressed the current state of free speech on campuses, the legal environment, and the tensions between free speech and inclusion.
The full event can be viewed here.
The event began with the screening of Bodies Upon the Gears, a documentary commemorating the Free Speech Movement at UC Berkeley in the 1960s. The film, narrated by Strossen, revisited the pivotal moments of the movement and the activist Mario Savio’s powerful call for free expression on campuses. The audience was reminded of Savio’s timeless observation that “free speech comes with responsibility.”
Following the film, Strossen and Chemerinsky had a fireside chat about the legal and philosophical challenges of free speech today. Strossen emphasized that free speech is under attack from various sides of the political spectrum. She argued that while concerns about inclusivity and respect for marginalized groups are important, restricting speech in the name of these values can have dangerous consequences. The very same arguments for restricting speech today were used in the past to suppress civil rights movements, and history shows that censorship often backfires.
Chemerinsky emphasized the importance of free speech on campuses but acknowledged universities face challenges. While they must protect controversial speech, they also have a duty to ensure safety. He referenced a student group, Law Students for Justice in Palestine, which posted an anti-Semitic caricature of him online. Weeks later, a protester at a dinner in his home disrupted the event with a speech on Palestinian issues, claiming free-speech rights. Chemerinsky clarified that private property, such as his home, is not subject to U.S. constitutional protections, and the dinner, intended to celebrate graduates, was disrupted. Both speakers agreed that free speech should not be absolute and that universities must strike a balance between protecting expression and maintaining a safe, inclusive environment.
A major part of the conversation focused on the tension between free speech and efforts to create inclusive, welcoming campus environments. Both scholars acknowledged that U.S. universities today are more diverse than they were during the 1960s, which brings additional challenges in managing different perspectives. Strossen praised the increased commitment to diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives but cautioned against using these principles to justify speech restrictions. She emphasized that free speech and inclusivity are not mutually exclusive, and that open dialogue can help bridge divides.
Chemerinsky echoed these sentiments but noted that students today may not have the same historical connection to the Free Speech Movement. He pointed out that many students equate free speech with the toxic rhetoric found on social media, which can lead to a desire for censorship. The solution, he argued, is better civic education, so students understand the importance of open debate in a democratic society.
The panel concluded with a discussion on the role of universities in fostering a culture of free expression. Strossen noted that surveys, including those conducted by the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE), show that many students continue feel stigma speaking openly on certain controversial topics, such as race, gender, and immigration, due to fear of social backlash. Both scholars called on university leaders to articulate clear policies that protect free expression while also promoting an inclusive environment where all students feel safe to participate in dialogue. Free speech is not just a legal issue but a cultural one, and fostering a healthy culture requires ongoing education.