About the Collection

Academic freedom is a complex idea, rooted in the 19th century German notion of freedom of teaching and freedom of research. It includes both individual and collective components, in that it can be invoked by an individual professor pursuing knowledge, but also by collective entities such as universities that seek to insulate themselves from state interference. If one includes various textual formulations, academic freedom is protected in more than half of constitutions in force today. In the United States, constitutional protection is relatively limited, but the idea has been enshrined in university policies, employment contracts, and documents of the American Association of University Professors (AAUP).

Issues of academic freedom surface in societies undergoing political and societal division. Such moments have emerged in the United States during the Cold War and now again in an era of resurgent populism and increased polarization. In the last three years, a number of state legislatures and university trustees have adopted policies constraining universities, including the elimination of tenure, new reporting requirements, and the elimination of departments. Universities have responded in various ways, including concluding settlements with the government, adopting new policies, and making statements. This collection gathers documents in one place for easy analysis and comparison.

We anticipate this collection will be of use to scholars and to Universities that are considering adopting or revising rules around academic freedom.

We initially focused on university policy statements related to free expression on campus, whether issued before or during the recent crisis of university governance. Free expression policies often adopt the so-called Chicago Principles, which originated as the Report of the 2015 Committee on Freedom of Expression under the leadership of Professor Geofrey Stone. Many schools (110 at present) simply adopted these Principles, but many others adopted their own documents crafted to local conditions.

Another major issue concerns the scope of corporate speech by universities. The University of Chicago’s Kalven Report on the University’s Role in Political and Social Action is a touchstone document, but its core idea of institutional neutrality is deeply contested in some quarters. Other schools have developed their own guidelines on when it is appropriate for university leadership to speak on social and political issues. We have also included the settlement agreements that universities reached Trump administration from 2025 onward. Together, these documents provide an overview of a changing regulatory environment for universities.

Our conceptual ontology was developed inductively through reading the various documents. It allows users to search for common concepts and ideas across many universities, providing a tool for research and policy development.

We acknowledge that a collection such as this one is inevitably incomplete. Users interested in submitting documents for inclusion can write to tginsburg@uchicago.edu or ashleymoran@utexas.edu

This collection was produced by the Comparative Constitutions Project (CCP) at the University of Texas and University of Chicago and the Forum for Free Inquiry and Expression at the University of Chicago. Documents published in this collection have been edited by the project team. An appropriate citation of the documents would be: