Advanced

University of Minnesota New Speech Policy

March 2025
University of Minnesota (Public college or university)
Minneapolis, MN

Identity of Speakers

  • The University of Minnesota Board of Regents
    Faculty/Staff
    Other

    University's governing board

Additional Information

  • Incident Nature:
    Other
  • Incident Political Orientation:
    Not Clear
  • Incident Responses:
    University administration changed university policy as a consequence
    Other
  • Incident Status:
    No litigation
  • Was Speech Code incident

Summary

In March 2025, the University of Minnesota Board of Regents approved a policy restricting institutional speech, requiring all official university communications on public matters to receive approval from the university president. The resolution passed with a 9–3 vote and sparked significant opposition from faculty, staff, and students who expressed concerns about potential infringements on free speech and academic freedom. Protests erupted during the Board’s meeting, where demonstrators voiced their opposition to the new policy.

During the same March meeting, a protester was arrested after refusing to leave the public gallery when Board security requested removal. The arrest underscored the heightened tensions between the university administration and its critics, who viewed the policy as a form of censorship and control over campus expression.

Following the adoption of the policy, members of the university community continued to express their discontent. Faculty members wore pieces of tape over their mouths during meetings as a symbol of feeling silenced, and protests persisted despite attempts to curtail them. The policy’s implementation led to widespread discussions about balancing institutional control with individual rights to free speech.

In response to the backlash, the university formed an advisory group to address concerns and provide recommendations regarding the new restrictions on institutional speech. This move reflected the administration’s acknowledgment of the controversy and its intent to engage the campus community in seeking a resolution.