UNC adopts both of Chicago’s free-speech principles

July 28, 2022 • 1:00 pm

I am informed that the Board of Trustees at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill has adopted both the Chicago Free Speech Principles, and the Kalven Principles that undergird free speech at the University of Chicago. The former guarantees the freest speech of any American university;  the latter ensures that no units of the university can make official pronouncements on morality, politics, or ideology unless they affect the direct mission of the institution. Here’s the directive taken from this meeting; the last two paragraphs are the important ones.

While more than eighty universities have adopted the Free Speech Principles, I believe that UNC Chapel Hill is the first school to adopt the Kalven Principles. That’s a harder thing to get done, for schools, particularly these days, just can’t resist making statements about their ideological and political principles, even though such statements chill the speech of opponents and therefore work against freedom of speech.

Here’s a tweet worth retweeting.

7 thoughts on “UNC adopts both of Chicago’s free-speech principles

  1. Let’s hope that this practice spreads to more universities. It’s a concrete way for universities to renew their commitments to free inquiry and thought. My guess is that administrators are not all that fond of conducting performative investigations into faculty speech and would love to have the Kalven Committee Report to guide them.

  2. Well, the UNC board of trustees, which I gather is significantly conservative in its views, over the last couple of years has gotten an earful from certain faculty and students, and the Raleigh News and Observer, regarding the Nicole-Hannah Jones hiring kerfuffle, and the concerns and views of an alumnus of and donor to the school of journalism. I anticipate these faculty and students and the N&O will work hard at having a problem with the Chicago Free Speech Principles and the Kalven Principles.



  3. Excellent news. This is exactly the type of policy change i am hoping that the alumni alliance Jerry wrote about recently would push. Now WE must not be reluctant about sending this example to the president and governing board of our schools…follow Jerry’s examples in which he freely would communicate with President Zimmer on important issues.

  4. “This article by Topol recommends getting TWO boosters, especially if you’re over 50. My doctor disagrees.”

    I follow Topol (among other experts) and, like many, still puzzle about getting the booster.
    I’m 58 and though I’ve had 2 shots and booster up to last December, and had COVID as well in December, I’d like to get another booster given we are undergoing a new covid wave in Ontario.

    However I’ve suffered Long Covid symptoms since my infection in December and it’s maddeningly hard to find any good information on the interaction of boosters while having Long Covid.
    There’s lots of anecdotes on both sides, which include many with LC saying their symptoms became markedly worse (or returned) upon getting boosted, which is frightening if you’ve been living with this.
    The last thing you want is for it to get worse!

    As for data, it’s so limited. There is a study or two that suggest vaccination for LC sufferers can result in a minority getting better, many having a neutral effect, but also in the data it shows the most common “adverse event” by far is a “relapse of long covid symptoms.”

    So it’s maddening. I’d love to get boosted to protect from COVID (which itself could make LC symptoms worse), but if boosting doesn’t do very much to protect from infection, and even mild infection can cause LC, then the “advantages” of the booster in my case don’t seem that high given the possibility of a booster making symptoms worse.

    As many are finding in this pandemic, even if you are a very science-minded individual, some questions have so little data it feels like you are left on your own.

Leave a Reply