The American Association of University Professors (AAUP) is challenging the concept of “institutional neutrality” in higher education institutions.

The AAUP makes a forceful argument against so-called “institutional neutrality” on its website: “The AAUP urges universities not to hide behind the pretense of remaining neutral in times of conflict or crisis. As the second Trump administration continues its assaults on academic freedom—and on critical research that saves lives, advances science and innovation, and benefits communities in the United States and around the world—neutrality is neither possible nor viable.”

The statement on its website indicates that “today, the AAUP released the new statement On Institutional Neutrality. As college and university communities begin to suffer the consequences of unchecked power, the statement reaffirms that institutional neutrality is neither a necessary condition for academic freedom nor categorically incompatible with it—and that respect for faculty voices and shared governance procedures is essential to sound decision-making and the protection of those who dissent.”

The AAUP offers a historical perspective on the development of ideas of “institutional neutrality” over the past 50 years or so. “Challenging the notion that institutional neutrality is ‘a timeless principle with a fixed meaning,’ the statement explores the history of the concept and the interpretation of the University of Chicago’s 1967 Kalven Report, produced amid widespread protests over the Vietnam War on US campuses and invoked now as an authoritative source by those calling for neutrality in response to today’s most pressing political and social issues. ‘A commitment to neutrality,’ the new statement declares, ‘is not some magic wand that conjures freedom. Calls for neutrality instead provide an opportunity to consider how various practices of an institution—not only its speech or silence but also its actions and policies—might promote a more robust freedom of teaching, research, and intramural and extramural speech.'”

The AAUP explains: “Formulated by a subcommittee of Committee A on Academic Freedom and Tenure, On Institutional Neutrality asserts that principles of academic freedom and shared governance should be chief considerations in the issuing of institutional and departmental statements and in decisions about financial investments and campus protest policies. Its conclusion notes, ‘A university’s decision to speak, or not; to limit its departments or other units from speaking; to divest from investments that conflict with its mission; or to limit protest in order to promote other forms of speech are all choices that might either promote or inhibit academic freedom and thus must be made with an eye to those practical results, not to some empty conception of neutrality. The defense of academic freedom has never been a neutral act.'”