Trump Policing Speech On College Campuses Is Anti-American, Will End In Disaster

President Donald Trump is playing a dangerous game when it comes to handling speech on college campuses, and it's time to hit the pause button.

Now, let me start by addressing anyone who is reading me for the first time. I'm not anti-Donald Trump. Not at all.

I voted for him. I think his second administration is off to an impressive start and I support many of his ideas.

That's why I was so concerned when I saw a message that could easily be interpreted as encroaching on free speech.

President Trump should tread carefully when it comes to dealing with speech on college campuses. (Photo by Andrew Harnik/Getty Images)

President Trump should be careful when it comes to messing with speech.

Protests erupted on college campuses across America following the Oct. 7 attack on Israel by Hamas terrorists. Some protests were peaceful. Many were not.

Some were downright illegal. The protests at Columbia and NYU required a police response in order to clear out people who refused to leave university-owned buildings.

Of course, unruly students breaking the law is hardly new on college campuses. The country watched all hell break loose during the anti-Vietnam War protests, and the gunshots of Kent State and the blood that flowed is still seared into America's memory.

Personally, I witnessed racially motivated protests during my time at the University of Wisconsin, including protesters stopping the flow of traffic on the main street through the campus.

Despite all the examples above, I've always believed that risking altercations and escalations is better than treading on free speech at all.

That's why I was so troubled and surprised to see a message from Trump that appeared to be the motherload of slippery slopes for bad ideas tied to speech.

He wrote the following this week on Truth Social:

"All Federal Funding will STOP for any College, School, or University that allows illegal protests. Agitators will be imprisoned/or permanently sent back to the country from which they came. American students will be permanently expelled or, depending on the crime, arrested. NO MASKS! Thank you for your attention to this matter."

President Donald Trump wants to stop federal funding for universities that allow "illegal protests." (Credit: Donald Trump/TruthSocial)

His post quickly drew a response from FIRE denouncing it, as all free speech organizations should. FIRE released, in part, the following statement:

"Colleges can and should respond to unlawful conduct, but the president does not have unilateral authority to revoke federal funds, even for colleges that allow "illegal" protests. 

If a college runs afoul of anti-discrimination laws like Title VI or Title IX, the government may ultimately deny the institution federal funding by taking it to federal court, or via notice to Congress and an administrative hearing. It is not simply a discretionary decision that the president can make.  

President Trump also lacks the authority to expel individual students, who are entitled to due process on public college campuses and, almost universally, on private campuses as well.

…

As FIRE knows too well from our work defending student and faculty rights under the Obama and Biden administrations, threatening schools with the loss of federal funding will result in a crackdown on lawful speech. Schools will censor first and ask questions later. 

Even the most controversial political speech is protected by the First Amendment. As the  Supreme Court reminds us, in America, we don’t use the law to punish those with whom we disagree. Instead, "[a]s a Nation we have chosen a different course—to protect even hurtful speech on public issues to ensure that we do not stifle public debate." 

Esha Bhandari, deputy director of the ACLU’s Speech, Privacy, and Technology Project, explained, "The federal government cannot mandate expulsion of students or threaten funding cuts to punish constitutionally protected speech on campus. While the administration can enforce Title VI to ensure a learning environment free from harassment, it cannot force universities into adopting restrictive speech codes that silence the viewpoints the government disfavors."

Translation: Trump's claim in his Truth Social post almost certainly isn't legal.

President Donald Trump shouldn't do anything to threaten speech on college campuses. (Photo by Andrew Harnik/Getty Images)

Putting aside the legality of his comments, let's address his post from a pro-free speech stance. There is no world where anyone who supports free speech, as I fully do, should ever support the idea that the executive branch holds the power to expel students from schools.

That's a decision for the universities to make. If there's illegal conduct, such as physical harm or credible threats, then deal with it in the courts. That's the system we have. Once a verdict is returned in the courts, the school can make a judgment on what to do next.

A counter-argument might be that the same students - Jewish students, for example - might feel unsafe by protests. That's an important thing to consider. If there's a real threat or violence, deal with it, but feeling uncomfortable doesn't mean you're the victim of a crime.

Also, who decides what exactly is an illegal protest? White and black citizens did sit-ins during the Civil Rights era. Without question, illegal by the letter of the law. Yet, was it immoral? Unethical? Should it have been punished by taking everything from them? By taking away the opportunity to learn?

Who is going to define this standard? The schools? The federal government? See the many problems we're already running into.

Furthermore, only offensive speech needs to be protected. If the speech were popular, nobody would want to crack down on it.

You're allowed to hate white people, you're allowed to hate black people, you're allowed to hate Jews, you're allowed to say racial slurs, you're allowed to smear any group of people you want and, as long as you're not threatening them, there's not a damn thing the government can do about.

Nor should there be.

Is President Donald Trump playing a dangerous game with speech on campus? (Photo by JIM WATSON/AFP via Getty Images)

It's the government's job to protect speech. It's not the government's job to set standards for what's offensive. For example, you are allowed to say the n-word on a main street in your hometown, and it's not illegal.

Grossly offensive? Without question, but not illegal. You're allowed to deny the Holocaust. Disgusting rhetoric? Absolutely. Illegal? Not even close in this country, and that's the standard we should all fight for.

The alternative is horrifying. Look no further than Europe to find out what happens when you don't defend free speech at all costs. Insults online in Germany land people in jail.

Is that the world you want to live in? I definitely don't, and the fact you're reading this tells me that you don't either.

I'd rather live in a world where people can say the most disgusting comments possible and the government can't do a single thing about it.

Why? Because bullets fly in both directions on this issue.

The other side will eventually take power.

People foolish enough to cheerlead the idea there's going to be a crackdown on campus speech and "illegal protests" should think long and hard about what they're endorsing.

You might like it now because you agree with suppressing anti-Israel voices. That's a viewpoint you're allowed to have. In fact, in this country, you're allowed to think whatever you want about the Israelis and the Palestinians.

Let's play this out. Someone supports cracking down on anti-Israeli speech they might see as offensive or possibly illegal (I can't imagine any speech about a nation ever reaching the threshold of being illegal), and they endorse expulsions and arrests.

What happens when people you disagree with take power and start arguing that things you want to say are grounds for removal?

What if a Democrat were in office and said protesting aid to Ukraine wouldn't be tolerated? Would anyone applaud that?

I certainly hope not.

So, why does the standard apply differently depending on what group of people are involved? We can't have protected classes in this country based on race, gender, religion or ethnic background. Everyone is equal, and that means their ideas - good or bad - should be treated the same.

It also means they're allowed to say whatever they want under the First Amendment. If you're not willing to protect the speech of people you dislike, then why would anyone come protect your speech when it's under attack?

If you don't think the other side will eventually get in power and use this precedent to their advantage, then you haven't paid enough attention to history.

People should always fight for more free speech. (Photo by Andrew Harnik/Getty Images)

Trump's plan is almost certainly going to fail in court, but that doesn't ultimately even matter. What matters is that any attempt to police speech - no matter how offensive it is - is a bad idea, and people who label themselves as pro-freedom should stand up and say it. This is our home. These are our schools, funded by our tax dollars, and people attending them have the right to their views - repulsive or not. Agree? Disagree? Let me know at David.Hookstead@outkick.com.