Editorial: Should we be worried about censorship?

This past September, Penn State University administrators made a controversial decision when they removed dozens of newstands from campus that contained its student newspaper due to political ads displayed inside.

This decision sparked debate on Penn State’s campus and beyond. Some argued the decision was an attack on free speech, while others thought the decision was within the school’s right. 

However,  a broader conversation was raised — one that questions the role of censorship and free speech in academic environments.

Penn State is a public institution, meaning it operates under legal obligations and must adhere to the First Amendment, which explicitly protects each individual’s freedom of speech.

However, private universities like Lehigh are not constitutionally required to protect free speech to the same degree public universities are.

Public universities are government-affiliated and legally bound to uphold these protections. But more and more public universities are battling with the balance of free speech and maintaining a nonpartisan environment.

The decision to remove newspaper stands at Penn State reflects this tension, as administrators claimed their actions were necessary to prevent inflammatory rhetoric and division within the campus.

For Lehigh, the likelihood of censorship similar to that at Penn State may depend less on constitutional protections and more on the university’s internal guidelines.

Critics like Jonathan Haidt, a New York University professor and social scientist, argue that any restriction of expression — even for the sake of harmony — risks the chances of creating a censorship of free speech within the institution.

Lehigh’s policies regarding free speech uphold academic freedom and encourage open dialogue. However, these policies can be altered or selectively enforced by administrators without violating the constitutional rights. 

So, does this mean that censorship could happen at Lehigh?

In principle, yes.

Lehigh’s private status allows administrators the ability to restrict certain forms of expression if they choose to do so.

An example of this is when Lehigh announced a unified posting policy in February 2024 that addressed where and how materials can be posted on campus.

“Only University departments, University organizations, and University community members are permitted to place postings on University property,” the policy states. “Posting on University property is a privilege extended for the purpose of communicating information about events, activities, programs, or services of University departments, University organizations, or University community members or information about educational, research, professional, or volunteer opportunities relevant to the University community.”

Essentially, the policy means Lehigh reserves the right to remove any postings that don’t align with procedures. 

So far, there haven’t been any cases in which posters were removed by the university, so the university might be wary of taking such drastic measures. 

Lehigh also has a history of fostering open debate and diverse viewpoints, but the existence of the  policy means the possibility of an alternate reality exists. 

And while private universities have more freedom to regulate speech, institutional culture can also play a significant role in determining whether censorship occurs. Specifically, a strong culture of academic freedom can act as a safeguard against administrative overreach.

For example, Lehigh has traditionally promoted intellectual debate, but the university isn’t immune to external pressures from the community, students or even social media.

In addition, social movements and political polarization can influence a university’s approach to free speech expression. 

Whether a university decides to remove newspapers from a stand or limit certain discussions, the action rarely solves the underlying issues it seeks to address. More often, it exacerbates division and mistrust between the student body and administration. 

About a month out from the presidential election, increasingly polarized discussions should be encouraged at Lehigh. The university should act as an arena for open dialogue, not arbiters of what is deemed acceptable in thought.

The United States is built by the right to preserve free speech within the country. Campuses and academic settings have even more of a duty to uphold this law.

While Lehigh is not bound by the First Amendment in the same way public institutions are, it does have a moral obligation to uphold the free exchange of ideas.

Institutions are tasked with shaping future leaders. Lehigh and all universities must prioritize free speech, not stifle it.