Fewer Students Back Campus Violence After Kirk Killing, but Nearly One in Three Still Say It's OK

WASHINGTON — Fewer college students say violence is an acceptable way to stop a campus speech than a year ago, but nearly one in three still say it is acceptable at least in rare cases, according to an annual survey released Wednesday by the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression.

Thirty percent of students endorsed that view, down from a record 34% in last year's report. The share remains well above 2020, when 18% said the same. FIRE surveyed nearly 63,000 students at more than 250 schools from Jan. 2 through June 3. Last year's rankings landed a day before conservative commentator Charlie Kirk was killed while speaking outdoors at Utah Valley University.

This year's report called Kirk's death a "profound impact" on student speech and described a "jarring year" for campus expression. FIRE President and CEO Greg Lukianoff said, "At a tumultuous time for higher education, we are seeing some progress in campus free speech policies and indications that students may be less willing to tolerate shoutdowns and violence on campus compared to recent years."

The average overall score was just over 61 of 100, the highest in seven years of the rankings and still a D-minus on FIRE's scale. One hundred twenty-one schools received an F. Only 24 averaged a C or better. One hundred forty schools received passing grades, up from 91 a year earlier.

The University of Chicago ranked first for the third time in seven years. Claremont McKenna College, last year's No. 1, finished second. Georgia Institute of Technology, Michigan Technological University and Vanderbilt University followed in FIRE's top tier. Chicago has long been associated with the 2015 Chicago Statement on free expression and the Kalven Report on institutional neutrality, documents FIRE treats as models.

New York University ranked last. FIRE cited, among other episodes, student-newspaper reports that the school did not book artists tied to the "No Music for Genocide" boycott for its V100 concert and the cancellation of a 2025 College Republicans panel titled "Immigrant Invasion." USA TODAY said it sought comment from NYU. Also near the bottom were the University of Washington, Texas State University, Northeastern University and Rutgers University–New Brunswick. FIRE said the worst-ranked campuses lost points on policies and controversy outcomes and that none had endorsed the Chicago Statement or adopted institutional neutrality.

Utah Valley University fell from 71 of 257 last year to 210 of 261. FIRE labeled its climate "challenging" and said it is "evident that the assassination has had negative effects on the campus speech climate." After Kirk's killing, the university canceled a commencement address by commentator Sharon McMahon, citing "increased safety concerns." McMahon had called the death "horrific" and said it "never should have happened," then added that it "does not erase the harm many experienced from his words and the ensuing actions his followers took." The campus chose no featured speaker. FIRE called that a "mistake." "Rather than deplatforming McMahon, UVU should respond to every instance of and every call for censorship with a clear defense of free expression," the report said.

Administrative-support scores at Utah Valley rose. Twenty-nine percent of students last year said it was "very" or "extremely" likely administrators would protect speech in a controversy; 42% said so this year. Earlier FIRE polling weeks after the shooting found students, especially conservatives and those at Utah Valley, less willing to speak.

Texas State recorded the steepest drop, to 259 from 112. FIRE pointed to the firing of a professor over remarks at an online socialist conference and to a student who was "no longer" enrolled after a video mocking Kirk's death. Gov. Greg Abbott had called for expulsion; the Texas Tribune reported it was unclear whether the student was expelled or withdrew. USA TODAY sought comment from the university.

Other campuses moved the other way. The University of California, Davis, jumped from 252 to 24. Harvard, Barnard and Columbia also posted large gains. FIRE said Harvard, Vanderbilt and Dartmouth have in recent years rewritten policies and spoken publicly for open debate. "This is the way," the report said. "We hope more colleges and universities start to agree with us in the coming years."

The survey measured more than violence. Inside Higher Ed, drawing on the same release, reported that about three in 10 students said a professor should "definitely" or "probably" be fired for posting "it's OK to punch a Nazi" after Kirk's death; 71% said the professor should not. Students split more evenly on a post calling religious conservatives "fascist Bible-thumpers." A third said a professor should be fired for posting "we're going to make America great again." Forty-two percent said the same about calling colleges "progressive indoctrination centers." Israel and Palestine remained among the hardest topics to discuss openly.

FIRE argues that campus climate is not only a matter of handbooks. "Political polarization, intolerance of disagreement and fear of social consequences" shape what students will say, the group wrote. "Colleges cannot fully control the attitudes students bring to campus, but their policies, leadership and responses to controversy can either strengthen or weaken the culture of free expression."

The assassination produced two currents that the numbers try to hold at once. One is a modest retreat from the idea that fists can cancel a talk. The other is a chill: conservative students quieter, a Utah campus punished in the rankings for canceling a speaker in the name of safety, and a wave of workplace punishments for online comments about Kirk that FIRE has tracked beyond higher education.

A 4-point drop in acceptance of violence is not a conversion to John Stuart Mill. It is a move off a peak that FIRE called alarming a year ago. An average score of 61 is still a failing culture by the group's own curve. Chicago at No. 1 and NYU at the bottom describe a split that policies can widen or narrow. Lukianoff's "cautious" progress depends on whether administrators treat the next controversial invitation as a test of security theater or of the rules they print in the catalog.

Kirk's killing did not invent the argument over who may speak on a quad. It made the cost of getting the argument wrong visible in a way a survey item about "rare cases" usually is not. The students who still say violence is sometimes acceptable are fewer than last year. They are not few.