Free Speech on Campus and FAIR’s Commitment to Civil Disagreement

Disagreements aren’t just permissible within our community; they're valuable. They reflect the genuine complexity of the issues at stake and the intellectual diversity that makes FAIR strong.

As the cultural pendulum continues to swing in unpredictable ways, it’s increasingly clear that our shared values matter more than ever.

FAIR was founded with an ambitious yet essential mission: Advancing civil rights and liberties for all Americans while promoting a common culture based on fairness, understanding, and humanity. Our focus has been clear from the beginning: countering identity-based policies and practices that undermine individual dignity by treating people primarily as members of racial or identity groups rather than as unique human beings. We've consistently defended those who face repercussions for expressing viewpoints that challenge prevailing orthodoxies on identity-related issues.

Since the presidential election, and especially during the last few months, the values of our community—much like the rest of the country—have been tested. FAIR's Substack recently published two essays on campus protests and academic freedom. The contrasting perspectives —examining governmental authority regarding immigrant protesters and the broader principles of academic freedom—sparked vigorous debate among our community members. This robust exchange of views and opposing perspectives—visible in the comments sections—captures on a micro level the larger challenges our society faces on a macro level. They also reflect precisely what FAIR's pro-human approach represents: the ability to engage with different viewpoints thoughtfully and respectfully.

In light of the exchanges on our Substack and recent campus tensions, I feel it appropriate to provide clarity on FAIR's position regarding the free speech issues implicated. As a preliminary matter, I offer these important reminders:

First, FAIR embraces viewpoint diversity. Publishing contrasting perspectives on complex issues isn’t a bug; it's a feature of our pro-human approach. We believe that engaging with different viewpoints strengthens our understanding and helps us refine our positions. When we publish differing perspectives on campus protests—examining both concerns about deportation consequences for immigrant protesters and the importance of protecting academic freedom—we’re modeling the civil disagreement we hope to see in society.

Second, our free speech advocacy centers on identity-based restrictions. We're committed to protecting individuals who faced repercussions for challenging orthodox views on identity-related issues. Our advocacy focuses specifically on ensuring that discussions about race, identity, and related topics remain open to diverse perspectives.

Third, we recognize specialized roles in advocacy. Organizations like the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE) have developed deep expertise in First Amendment jurisprudence and campus free speech issues. Rather than duplicate or attempt to compete with FIRE’s efforts, FAIR has chosen to instead support and amplify them by focusing our energy primarily on identity-based policies and practices that restrict speech and academic freedom. Our goal is to go where we’re needed rather than risk stepping on the toes of organizations that are already doing great work in their areas of focus.

The Soul of FAIR

FAIR's advocacy for individuals expressing viewpoints that challenge prevailing identity-based orthodoxies remains true in the context of campus free speech.

We support former Penn State English professor Zack DePiero, who faced retaliation for questioning antiracism policies and training that proclaimed "White Teachers Are a Problem" and that "there is a problem with the white race." This case exemplified FAIR's mission to uphold free speech and oppose policies that discriminate against individuals based on their racial identity while limiting viewpoint diversity in academic settings.

We also supported Professor Timothy Jackson in his lawsuit against the University of North Texas, where he faced retaliation for criticizing an academic paper that characterized classical music as systemically racist. Jackson’s efforts to defend his discipline from identity-based critiques resulted in threats to his academic standing and efforts to remove him as journal editor.

FAIR filed a civil rights complaint with the Department of Education on behalf of Matan Goldstein, a Jewish American-Israeli student at the University of Virginia who was physically assaulted, targeted with ethnic slurs, and faced retaliation after reporting discriminatory harassment that forced him to self-censor and hide his religious identity.

These cases exemplify FAIR's commitment to challenging identity-based restrictions on free speech. We have consistently defended individuals who are targeted specifically because of their immutable characteristics, and we stand against institutions that silence those who report discrimination based on their race, ethnicity, sex, sexual orientation, religion, or national origin.

Navigating the Current Landscape

The recent campus protests concerning Israel and Palestine have revealed complex tensions between free speech, academic freedom, and the proper balance between competing values. These tensions highlight the importance of maintaining viewpoint diversity and learning to communicate across divides on sensitive and difficult topics.

What’s striking about the current discourse is that voices from all across the political spectrum are raising legitimate concerns about the importance of maintaining environments where all students can learn and express themselves freely. Progressive civil libertarians worry about the silencing of pro-Palestinian perspectives while Jewish Americans and conservative advocates emphasize the need to protect Jewish students from harassment, intimidation, and a growing tide of antisemitism. Although viewpoints on both “sides” range from moderate to extreme, these perspectives are often conflated and don’t allow for the kind of nuanced discussion the issues deserve.

In this highly polarized climate, some have questioned why FAIR has not similarly advocated on behalf of pro-Palestinian protesters facing consequences for their campus activism. This nuance highlights an important feature of our organizational focus.

Like FIRE, FAIR fundamentally supports legally protected free speech for all Americans, regardless of viewpoint or perspective. However, our specific mission—unlike FIRE's broader First Amendment mandate—centers on equal protection of individuals who face discrimination or harassment based on identity-related issues, particularly when expressing perspectives that run counter to DEI and other prevailing identity-based orthodoxies. Put simply, whenever an individual’s right to freedom of expression is restrained based on their immutable characteristics—race, ethnicity, sex, sexual orientation, religion, or national origin—FAIR will always stand ready to defend their rights.

In the context of campus restrictions on pro-Palestinian speech, this distinction becomes clearer. Such cases fall outside FAIR's mission because they typically involve protecting speech that might be viewed as discriminatory toward an identity group (e.g., Jewish students) rather than protecting members of an identity group who exercise their free speech rights and face repercussions specifically because of their identity (e.g., Goldstein or DePiero).

This nuanced and focused approach allows FAIR to complement rather than duplicate the work of organizations like FIRE, which has developed deep expertise in First Amendment jurisprudence and campus free speech issues, in particular. By maintaining this strategic focus on the intersection of the First and Fourteenth Amendments, FAIR recognizes the valuable complementary work that other organizations undertake in the broader free speech landscape while more effectively advancing our core mission of promoting a common culture based on fairness, understanding, and humanity.

A Call for Principled Engagement

To our community members who disagree about the proper balance between free speech protections and other important values, I offer this perspective: disagreements aren’t just permissible within our community; they're valuable. They reflect the genuine complexity of the issues at stake and the intellectual diversity that makes FAIR strong.

What unites FAIR's community isn’t our agreement on every policy issue or current event, but rather our shared commitment to the values that have been enumerated on our About Page since our launch in March of 2021:

• Approaching difficult issues with intellectual humility

• Recognizing the individuality and humanity of all people involved

• Seeking solutions that protect both freedom and dignity

• Engaging in civil discourse even when disagreements run deep

As we continue to navigate these complex issues, I encourage all members of FAIR's community to:

Be tolerant and listen carefully to perspectives different from your own. The comments on our recent publications reveal thoughtful people wrestling with difficult questions. There is wisdom to be gained from engaging with these diverse viewpoints, even if we strongly disagree with them.

Maintain a pro-human focus. Remember that behind every position is a human being, motivated and informed by their own experiences, educations, convictions, concerns, and values. This means resisting the temptation to dismiss others based on identity or perceived political affiliation, and modeling the kind of engagement that is in keeping with FAIR’s principles.

Look for common ground. Despite differences on specific policies, most FAIR supporters share core values of fairness, open inquiry, and respect for individual dignity. These shared commitments provide a foundation for productive dialogue and should be the foundation upon which even strong disagreements are had.

Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. famously warned that "injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere." As we navigate this challenging new landscape, let us carry in our hearts a willingness to hold those we support and those we oppose, to the same standards. The values we hold dear cannot possibly endure if we choose to adhere to them selectively.

FAIR will continue to publish diverse perspectives on challenging issues. We'll continue to advocate for policies that treat people as individuals rather than primarily as members of identity groups. And we'll continue to model civil disagreement as an alternative to both enforced conformity and unproductive polarization.

In doing so, we hope to demonstrate that a community united by core values can still accommodate principled disagreements—and emerge stronger for having engaged with them.

We welcome you to share your thoughts on this piece in the comments below. Click here to view our comment section moderation policy.

The opinions expressed here do not necessarily reflect those of the Foundation Against Intolerance & Racism or its employees.

In keeping with our mission to promote a common culture of fairness, understanding, and humanity, we are committed to including a diversity of voices and encouraging compassionate and good-faith discourse.

We are actively seeking other perspectives on this topic and others. If you’d like to join the conversation, please send drafts to submissions@fairforall.org.