Academic freedom is a hallmark of higher education, but as universities find themselves examining more socially, politically, and scientifically complex issues, stronger public debate follows.
“As debates over academic freedom and responsibility and higher education’s value have become more intense, I noticed that faculty and policy makers often have significant misconceptions about academic freedom’s boundaries and legal footing,” said Dean Kent Barnett.
To address these misconceptions, Barnett partnered with the Ohio State Law Journal (OSLJ), under the leadership of editor-in-chief Anu Subramaniam ’27, and several nationally recognized colleagues at Moritz to create the Academic Freedom Project. The initiative provides an opportunity for examining some of the most pressing questions surrounding academic freedom.
“The College of Law’s public-service mission is to use our legal training to inform legal debates,” Barnett said. “The Project will begin with an objective inquiry into the state of academic freedom along four dimensions, and the Law Journal plans to continue the Project to investigate legal developments and normative scholarship.”
Four members of the OSLJ staff are working with a faculty advisor to draft a memo about their research findings, which will then be compiled into a journal article. Professor Courtlyn Roser-Jones is providing editorial leadership on the Project, overseeing and ensuring cohesion between all the projects.
“This Project seeks to document the history of academic freedom law, summarize modern legislative and judicial trends that put academic freedom rights in jeopardy, and predict how courts might analyze these cases based off these traditional legal standards and new modern contexts,” added DC Benincasa ’27, executive managing editor for the Project. “I hope that the project will give the public a better idea of the legal ground that universities, professors, and students have to stand on in asserting their academic freedom rights to teach and learn independently without state interference,” said Benincasa.
Students are exploring the following research questions:
How, if at all, does academic freedom protect professors’ curricular choices and classroom speech?
Benincasa is working alongside Professor Ned Foley to examine professors’ individual academic freedom rights within the classroom. They are also researching a university’s rights in determining curriculum without state legislative interference. Benincasa found that, in the past, state legislatures rarely passed law encroaching on university curriculum, which means there is very little case law or precedent. As this norm shifts, however, there are several legal avenues courts could pursue.
“(B)ecause of the quantity of legislation passed limiting university curricular independence, federal courts will likely encounter frequent challenges against these laws, he explained. “So, it will be interesting to see if courts examine these cases under a similar analysis as they do for cases about a professor’s classroom academic freedom rights, or if they go in a different direction with different legal standards.”
How, if at all, does academic freedom protect professors’ speech in institutional governance?
Alan Grinberg ’27 and Associate Dean Ric Simmons are looking into how academic freedom relates to the right of professors to speak on institutional governance, and whether academic freedom will shield a professor in those contexts.
“Unlike the discussions that go on in the classroom, a professor typically does not speak as an expert when he or she vocally criticizes their school's gender-neutral policies or allocation of grant money, for example,” Grinberg explained. “With this uncertain and volatile landscape, it is important to know how and why academic freedom protects professors when discussing these potentially hostile topics, especially when their jobs or tenure may be on the line.”
How, if at all, does academic freedom protect professors’ extracurricular speech?
As professors increasingly share their expertise through outlets like podcasts, social media, and other public channels, the line between academic and extramural speech is much less clear. Austin Eagen ’27 and Associate Dean Felix Chang are researching how the law understands that speech, particularly when there is a connection between what a professor says publicly and the expertise they developed through their academic work.
“Society relies heavily on scholars and other experts to bring specialized knowledge into public conversations and policymaking, while those same public spaces have become increasingly politicized,” said Eagen. “That has made professors who engage publicly more exposed to political and institutional controversy, making the relationship between academic freedom and extramural speech increasingly important to understand.”
How, if at all, does academic freedom protect students’ speech in (and work product from) the classroom?
College students have traditionally been left out of the academic freedom rights articulated by the US Supreme Court. Sydney Ellis ’27 and Dean Kent Barnett are exploring student free speech protections in other sources of law, like state constitutions, state statutes, and administrative rules and policies.
“Implicit in this research is the idea that college students contribute to the broader purpose of colleges to search for truth,” Ellis explained. “However, students are also not the experts in their field. They come to college to learn. This paper explores the tensions between students, professors, and administrators regarding when student speech can be restricted or when the university or professor can require a student to affirm a particular idea.”
As they continue their research, Ellis hopes it will not only educate readers about student freedoms but also develop an appreciation for the value of free speech in college classrooms.
“While this research exists to ensure those engaged in debates about academic freedom have a common understanding of the law, my hope is that readers approach this research with a deeper curiosity, considering for themselves which laws and policies are a help or a hinderance to higher education and our democracy,” she said.
The students’ willingness to wrestle thoughtfully with these complex questions has also demonstrated a high caliber of legal knowledge.
"We produce excellent, thoughtful lawyers and leaders at the Moritz College of Law," Barnett said. "Their work on this project simply reinforces this fact—all while showcasing how our students work directly with our faculty to produce knowledge and grow as thought leaders."