Kadish Workshop in Law, Philosophy, and Political Theory: Genevieve Lakier, The University of Chicago Law School

The Student Protests and the Failed Promise of Free Speech Maximalism on Campus

Over the past decade or so, universities across the country have expended considerable symbolic and sometimes economic resources to affirm their commitment to a libertarian or speech-maximizing view of the campus as an expressive domain. They have insisted that, as educational institutions, they believe in protecting as much speech as possible. They have also, however, used at times considerable force to repress non-violent—and in some cases, non-disruptive student protest. This was made evident by the widescale repression, both last year and this year, of the energetic, often defiant, but largely non-violent antiwar protests that emerged on campuses across the country last year.

This paper examines the tension between the ideal and the reality of campus speech regulation in what we might call the campus free speech era—during a time when administrators ardently proclaim their commitment to freedom of speech even while sending in police to arrest student protestors. It argues that at least some of the tension between speech-maximizing policies and an increasingly repressive regime of speech regulation on campus stems from how universities have conceived and operationalize the meaning of freedom of speech on campus. In particular, it argues that the problems with the protection of freedom of speech on campus reflect broader problems with contemporary free speech law and theory, and specifically, the tendency in both First Amendment and non-First Amendment free speech law to define free speech for the most part as the right to speak without constraint by content-based speech restrictions, but as not much more than that. It suggests that more robust protection of freedom of speech on campus is possible, but in order to achieve it, universities need to reconsider how it is that they conceive and operationalize their free speech guarantees. 

Genevieve Lakier, Professor of Law, Herbert and Marjorie Fried Teaching Scholar

Genevieve Lakier teaches and writes about freedom of speech and American constitutional law. Her work examines the changing meaning of freedom of speech in the United States, the role that legislatures play in safeguarding free speech values, and the fight over freedom of speech on the social media platforms.

Genevieve has an AB from Princeton University, a JD from New York University School of Law, and an MA and PhD in anthropology from the University of Chicago. Between 2006 and 2008, she was an Academy Scholar at the Weatherhead Center for International and Area Studies at Harvard University. After law school, she clerked for Judge Leonard B. Sand of the Southern District of New York and Judge Martha C. Daughtrey of the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals. Before joining the faculty, Genevieve taught at the Law School as a Bigelow Fellow and Lecturer in Law.

About the Workshop:

A workshop for presenting and discussing work in progress in moral, political, and legal theory. The central aim is to provide an opportunity for students to engage with philosophers, political theorists, and legal scholars working on normative questions. Another aim is to bring together people from different disciplines who have strong normative interests or who speak to issues of potential interest to philosophers and political theorists.  

The theme for the Fall 2024 workshop is “Disagreement.”

This semester the workshop is co-taught by Josh Cohen and Véronique Munoz-Dardé.