How Would President Trump’s Proposed Executive Order Protect Campus Free Speech?
President Trump’s recent CPAC address included this pointed barb:
Today I’m proud to announce that I will be very soon signing an executive order requiring colleges and universities to support free speech if they want federal research dollars.
In the speech Trump linked his threat to the violence Hayden Williams had recently experience on the campus of U.C. Berkeley. Williams was advocating for conservative causes when he was punched in the face by a man passing by. The assault was caught on camera and went viral.
But it’s not the first time that U.C. Berkeley has been in the free speech spotlight. And it’s not the first time President Trump has issued this kind of warning.
Not the First Time
On February 2, 2017, when violence disrupted the visit of then-Breitbart writer Milo Yiannopoulos, Trump tweeted almost the same remark that he made at this year’s CPAC. I’m not sure anything came of it.
If U.C. Berkeley does not allow free speech and practices violence on innocent people with a different point of view – NO FEDERAL FUNDS?
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) February 2, 2017
Responses to Trump’s Remark
The Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE) wants to know more about what the President has in mind. FIRE issued this statement:
FIRE is aware that President Donald Trump announced to an audience at the Conservative Political Action Conference today that he intends to sign an executive order that would require colleges receiving federal funding to protect free speech on their campuses. While we are glad that this important national issue has the President’s attention, we do not currently have any more information on the details of the executive order. We are looking forward to learning more about this initiative in the coming days.
The Heterodox Academy is a collection of profs, admins, and grad students. They promote open inquiry, viewpoint diversity, and constructive disagreement on college campuses. Debra Mashek, executive director of Heterodox Academy, give a mildly negative response:
We need diversity and dialogue, not decrees. Heterodox Academy encourages individual colleges and universities to advance common-sense policies and practices that promote teaching, learning and discovery. Higher ed would not benefit from a blunt, top-down, partisan decree that politicizes the academy’s core values of open inquiry and academic freedom. Governments cannot legislate campus cultures.
How Might It Work?
Those hoping Trump will issue a free speech-related executive order point to the Solomon Amendment as a model. The Solomon Amendment refers to a 1996 law barring federal funds from going to schools that banned military recruiting or ROTC programs on campus. A 2006 U.S. Supreme Court ruling upheld the Solomon Amendment.
Frederick M. Hess and Grant Addison, both with the American Enterprise Institute, propose three requirements for colleges wanting to receive federal research funds:
- Colleges and universities must offer assurance that they do not restrict constitutionally protected speech, engage in viewpoint discrimination, or constrain free inquiry.
- Schools awarded a federal research grant or award must commit to safeguarding free inquiry to the best of their ability, and to appropriately addressing any policies or practices that serve to hinder free inquiry or scholarly independence.
- Institutions must formally acknowledge that, in accordance with federal policy, those found to be in violation of these commitments may be obliged to refund the balance of funds for ongoing federally funded research and be rendered ineligible for future research funding.
What About Enforcement?
Hess and Addison’s requirements look reasonable. But enforcement might be easier said than done. In the U.C. Berkeley case, for example, the school has vigorously defended its commitment to free speech, even in the face of the President’s attacks.
I doubt this would be about whether conservative speakers get heckled. Or if liberals get more campus invites than conservatives. Or even if a conservative is punched be a liberal. So long as the school’s police department responds appropriately, and that school checks boxes 1-3 above, there wouldn’t be a problem.
What you’d have to look for, I think, is evidence of employees or students experiencing actual discrimination because of their minority views. They’d have to be harmed. Like Duke University’s professor Paul Griffiths, who resigned after criticizing Duke’s anti-bias training.
Or UCLA’s James Enstrom, a non-tenured professor. Enstrom was fired in 2010 after more than 35 years of service. His crime? Questioning several climate studies used to justify the state’s proposed diesel regulations. Or science professors denied tenure over questioning the claims of macroevolution. Actual discrimination and harm to members of a university. From actions and inactions on the part of that university’s leaders.
What’s Next?
Paul Fain writes that the White House’s promised executive order may be timed to coincide with its budget release this week. Fain reports that White House sources indicate that other education-related executive orders have also been in the works. Perhaps a few may land together.
One of the other possible executive orders deals with risk sharing: financial consequences for colleges whose students aren’t able to repay their loans. Another may be the addition of program-level student outcome data to the College Scorecard.
Stay tuned.
Dr. Alex Chediak (Ph.D., U.C. Berkeley) is a professor and the author of Thriving at College (Tyndale House, 2011), a roadmap for how students can best navigate the challenges of their college years. His latest book is Beating the College Debt Trap. Learn more about him at www.alexchediak.com or follow him on Twitter (@chediak).
