Free speech is under threat from both the Left and the Right, with each side feeling the political and cultural pressures that erode open discourse.

A recent report from the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE) reveals a troubling surge in censorship on college campuses, targeting students across the political spectrum. The report highlights two ideologically opposed groups as prime examples. “What do Students for Justice in Palestine and Turning Point USA have in common?” FIRE posted on X. “They were the most targeted campus groups over the last five years. … When it comes to censorship, no one is safe.”

Over the course of five years, FIRE documented 637 instances of students and student groups facing punishment for exercising speech protected by the First Amendment — or what would be protected at public institutions. “From 2020 through 2024,” the report added, “FIRE documented 1,014 students and student groups who were either targeted for or recipients of punishment from either their administration or student government in response to their protected speech.” From 2023 to 2024, FIRE found most of the targeted expression was traced to college administrators.

The penalties ranged from censorship and suspensions to funding cuts and disenrollments, revealing a pattern of what some consider administrative overreach. Moreover, the data was undeniable: “The uptick in campus speech controversies in response to the war in Gaza was dramatic.” At least 41% of “student speech controversies in 2023 involved speech students made about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict after the Oct. 7 attacks.”

FIRE’s Sean Stevens sharply criticized these trends found in the report. “This is unacceptable coming from people whose job it is to serve college students and ensure that their rights are protected,” he stressed. “Their job should be to protect students’ free speech rights, not torpedo them.”

FIRE Senior Researcher Logan Dougherty echoed this sentiment in an interview with The College Fix: “Neither the political left nor right are innocent when it comes to chilling student speech. Regardless of where the pressure to censor originates, administrators have shown a willingness to suppress students’ protected speech when convenient.” He underscored the broader stakes, adding, “This is more than just a left versus right issue — it’s a freedom of speech issue.”

Ultimately, FIRE’s report concluded that “the question isn’t whether the speech in question is offensive or provocative — sometimes it surely is.” Rather, “The question is whether we are willing to protect the principle of free expression even when doing so is hard. If we aren’t, then today’s targets could be tomorrow’s enforcers — and vice versa.” This warning sets the stage for a deeper dive into the chaos unfolding at universities, where free speech and civility are locked in a high-stakes tug-of-war.

Enter Joseph Backholm, senior fellow for Biblical Worldview and Strategic Engagement at Family Research Council, who unpacked the issue with The Washington Stand. “Universities do have a responsibility to protect the free speech of their students,” he stated, acknowledging the tightrope they walk. “Universities have a difficult job of trying to maintain a respectful learning environment in an increasingly volatile cultural climate.”

It’s not just that people disagree — disagreement is as old as time, Backholm noted. What’s new, he said, is the raw, unfiltered way those differences are unleashed. “As we become more polarized, the range of acceptable behavior seems to be widening, and that’s presenting real challenges for universities,” Backholm argued.

He addressed the messy reality: “Even if they were interested in treating people fairly regardless of ideological belief, they would have to figure out how to maintain decorum while protecting free speech. That’s not simple.” But there’s a bigger force at play — an ideological shift fueling the flames. “Leftism is intolerant of ideas they disagree with,” Backholm asserted, pointing to the takeover of higher education by those who prioritize ideology over open discourse. “In many cases, those educators aren’t trying to make students capable of thinking critically about complicated ideas but are figuring out how to make students useful to their political cause. The behavior of administrators has changed as the goals of administrators have changed.”

Zooming out, Backholm connected the dots, stating, “Civil liberties in the West flow from the idea that people have inalienable rights by virtue of being created in the image of God.” According to Backholm, this belief underpins the right to speak freely, even when it ruffles feathers. “Recognizing a person’s right to express what they really think is a way of recognizing their innate value,” he said. Lose that foundation, and Backholm warned that religious freedom, free speech, and mutual respect come crashing down.

“If we lose the belief that our friends and our neighbors have the same value and, therefore, the same rights, even if we disagree with them, we will lose the general respect for religious freedom.” Backholm concluded, “Our individual freedom depends on our general recognition that we’re all equally valuable. Protecting that idea is key to protecting our individual freedoms.”