������ýapp�ٷ�

Ranking 249th out of 251 schools on ������ýapp�ٷ�’s recently released College Free Speech Rankings, New York University’s third-to-last showing suggests that the administration’s suppression of free expression — especially pro-Palestinian expression— has impacted its campus speech climate. 

This ranking comes as no surprise to ������ýapp�ٷ�, which has seen NYU trample on free speech time and time again in the past year. By engaging in viewpoint discrimination on multiple occasions, NYU flagrantly violated its own policies, including those that satisfy its accreditation requirements. That’s why we’re poised to file a complaint with NYU’s accreditor if it doesn’t commit to turning things around.

NYU’s list of recent free speech failings is long.

New York University

New York, NY

School Ranking

249 of 251

Due Process

Sexual misconduct: B

Non-sexual misconduct: C

Title IX: B

Speech Code

Yellow

Free Speech Climate

Overall score: 3

More Info

Last year, shortly after the October 7 attack on Israel and the beginning of the war in Gaza, NYU publicly launched an investigation into , a student who sent an email to the student body arguing that Israel bore responsibility for the attacks. On Oct. 16, we urged the university to end the investigation because, even if some who received the email found it offensive, it still constituted protected political expression under NYU policies. The university did not respond.

The school also publicly suspended and launched an investigation into Amin Husein, an adjunct professor, for public comments he made denying reports of Hamas’ war crimes. On Feb. 2, we similarly wrote in, urging the university to end its investigation into political speech. The university, again, did not respond. 

In a Sept. 6 letter, we refer to these cases and detail other violations of free expression at NYU, including instances in which:

• The university  to an event put on by the campus chapter of FIREfor Justice in Palestine, citing concerns about two “contentious” professors, that would have discussed a new book on the history of war in Gaza. An administrator  for suggesting the professors were contentious. 
• The university effectively  thought reform for student protesters arrested after police cleared a campus encampment by requiring them to write reflection papers about how their values affected their actions. FIREassigned to reflect  could not justify their actions or “challenge a conduct regulation,” and if their responses were not satisfactory to the university, the papers would be returned for further revisions. 

NYU did not respond to any of these letters, but we’re not taking silence for an answer. In our letter, we explain that NYU has violated not only its own policies, but also the standards of its accreditor, the Middle States Commission on Higher Education. MSCHE requires accredited institutions  “a commitment to academic freedom, intellectual freedom, [and] freedom of expression.” 

If NYU fails to turn things around, we’ll be taking it to its accreditor by way of an official complaint. An accreditor complaint is a method of notifying an accreditation agency, whose job is to certify that an institution maintains certain educational standards, that one of those institutions is out of compliance.  

Our letter continues:

NYU’s actions have sent an unmistakable message to students and faculty that not all opinions can be freely discussed and debated on its campus. If free speech is to flourish at NYU — as its policies intend and guarantee — the university must publicly recommit to expressive freedom and develop a plan to ensure no member of the NYU community fears punishment for their protected expression.

2025 College Free Speech Rankings expose threats to First Amendment rights on campus

Press Release

University of Virginia takes the top spot, while Harvard, Columbia, and NYU share an “Abysmal” free speech status.

Read More

Despite ������ýapp�ٷ�’s repeated interventions, NYU looks poised to continue punishing protected expression on campus. The school’s  single out the term “Zionist” as a “code word,” and state that the “[u]se or dissemination of tropes about protected groups” would violate the university’s nondiscrimination and anti-harassment policy. While using the term “Zionist” could be a part of a larger pattern of discriminatory harassment, NYU’s policy as written sweeps into its ambit a large amount of protected political speech. With an ongoing war in the Middle East, speech that strongly advocates for—or against—the Israeli or Palestinian cause cannot help but be offensive to many people. With few exceptions, it nevertheless remains, and must remain, free from official punishment..

The clock is ticking, and the ball is in the university’s court. NYU cannot reasonably justify its actions over the past year, but the institution still has time to recommit to free speech and start treating its students the way a diverse and pluralistic society demands. If not, two weeks from now, we’ll be filing the accreditor complaint.