On June 2, the Cornell Law School and other organizations, including the Cornell Review, co-sponsored an online panel discussion entitled, “Higher Education: the First Amendment and Academic Freedom.”
On the panel were:
- Robert C Platt ‘73 Law ‘76 of Cornellians United For Free Speech,
- Joanne Florino, MA ‘75 of the Philanthropy Roundtable
- Prof. Randy O. Wayne, Co-Chair of the Cornell Chapter of Heterodox Academy
- Connor Murnane, Campus Advocacy Chief of Staff, Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE)
The session drew 80 livestream viewers, and the Law School has posted the video for later viewing here.
Self-Censorship and Campus Climate
Florino emphasized the prevalence of self-censorship: “Even when you come across a faculty member who is sharing a different point of view, a less popular point of view, students are really concerned about whether they can change what they feel really comfortable saying. FIRE has proven this in many surveys.”
Wayne attributed self-censorship to the rise of postmodern philosophy: “The root cause is the acceptance of Postmodern philosophy, which denies objective reality and divides the world into the false binary of the oppressor and the oppressed. The acceptance of Postmodern philosophy is the root cause of the inability of people to speak.”
Murnane attributed the campus climate to a lack of education on First Amendment principles: “We are taking 18-year-olds, who are very accustomed to being in their own bubble, whether it is online or in their own friend groups, and they are not used to being exposed to different opinions. They are not used to going toe to toe with ideas they might find uncomfortable.”
Institutional Pressure, Academic Autonomy, and Institutional Free Speech
Platt traces the problem to the relationship between the university and how federal regulations have eroded university autonomy: “Starting with the Obama Administration, there have been more and more intrusions in the direct regulation of different things on campus, such as the Title IX sexual harassment rules or the rules under the Civil Rights Acts…the way they were imposed on academia started to undercut the authority of the university to behave in an autonomous manner.”
Wayne further expounded on institutions’ role in free speech. He stated an increasing portion of Cornell students in his classes feel free to speak their minds. But, Wayne further stated that they “were only freer to speak their mind because they tribalized” and “found out who they could trust to share their ideas.”
Faculty Culture and Generational Shifts
Florino thinks that much of this goes back to the way that faculty itself was educated. The faculty that educated her in the 1970s was educated during an optimistic post-WWII eraIn contrast, the faculty that were hired in the 1990s were educated during the upheaval of the 1960s.
Murnane believes the onus is on each professor to create the classroom environment that is open to different ideas.
Initiatives and Recommendations
Florino announced that in 2026, the Arts College will offer a pilot course called “Disagreement,” which will teach 300 first-year undergraduate students how to disagree in a constructive manner. The students will watch academic experts debate a number of important policy questions.
All of the panelists indicated that President Kotlikoff is the right person to serve as Cornell’s President and advocated for the inclusion of free speech training in new student orientation.
Wayne called for a return “to a color-blind, merit-based truth-seeking mission.” Cornell should require the faculty to be able to fairly teach both sides of an issue.
Murnane reported that Cornell was developing a position on institutional neutrality that would have Cornell and its units refrain from taking a position on political or social issues.
The Trump Admin and Academic Freedom
Platt asked how academic freedom can be defended when “President Trump and many other outsiders are trying to impose various viewpoints on Cornell.” He posed that “you need an advocate on the inside to advocate for free speech, freedom of expression, academic freedom, viewpoint diversity, and due process.”
Florino worried about civil society and the implications of placing executive bans on various visas. Murnane suggests making a distinction between protected ideas and unprotected conduct to decide the issue of student visas. Wayne questioned the idea-conduct distinction and noted that academic freedom is not “a suicide pact” that would prevent academia from defending itself from being destroyed. Murnane responded that vandalism and disruption are unprotected conduct.
Murnane would put the burden on the university to enforce the rules and allow international students to learn how the norms and boundaries of free expression work.
Audience Questions
A member of the audience asked what steps Day Hall could take to diversify the political viewpoint of the faculty. As a first step, Wayne wants the university to agree that its mission is to be a truth-seeking, evidence-based institution.
Florino finally noted Cornell is a community, and must cultivate respect from its members. Cornell has stumbled by failing to build respect into its tradition of allowing dissent and protest.
This panel shed light on the future of University free speech and the multitude of directions it can take. Discussions like this continue to be important as higher education and free speech continue to be under national scrutiny by federal actors and the people themselves.
