After seven months and multiple voting delays, the University of California Board of Regents is nearing approval of a revised policy on how academic departments should present political and social opinions on their websites. This new policy largely aligns with standards adopted by faculty in 2022, reigniting discussions about academic freedom.

The process has been contentious, with some pro-Palestinian students criticizing earlier versions of the proposed policy. They viewed these versions as attempts to limit free speech and suppress protests against Israel. The turmoil in Gaza and dissatisfaction with the UC leadership’s stance on the conflict, including their lack of calls for a ceasefire or divestment from companies associated with Israel, heightened concerns among both students and faculty.

The university must further define its guidelines on speech and expression by this fall, as the latest state budget withholds $25 million from the UC until it submits a report to the governor detailing its policies on public demonstrations and free speech. Although academic freedom and student free speech are separate issues, they often intersect, especially on sensitive topics such as Islamophobia and antisemitism.

Most regents were not specific about the motivation behind the plan, but Regent Hadi Makarechian indicated in January that the proposal was partly in response to political statements related to Hamas and Palestinians. That meeting saw some tension, with calls for maintaining decorum.

The new regulations, approved today by a joint committee and set to be voted on by the full board tomorrow, stipulate that writings deviating from research, course information, and administrative announcements should not be posted on the homepages of academic departments and divisions. Instead, these writings can be featured on separate departmental web pages designated for opinions. The full board is expected to approve the rules, which will take effect immediately.

Student Regent Josiah Beharry was the only member to vote against the measure.

Under the new policy, "discretionary expressions"—which include commentary on various events and issues—must be clearly labeled as personal opinions that do not necessarily represent the university's or campus's views.

The policy specifically excludes academic research, course content, or other scholarly activities from restrictions on the homepage, addressing concerns raised in the previous draft from March. It also does not restrict content posted on external websites.

In May, James Steintrager, chair of the Academic Senate, told CalMatters that he was confident the new policy would not infringe on academic freedom or free speech. He expressed concerns about the necessity of the policy but acknowledged that, with the Senate's input, the Board of Regents had improved the proposal.

This view contrasts sharply with the initial faculty reaction to the January proposal, which many found confusing and overly restrictive. Steintrager described the January plan as potentially "draconian," suggesting it aimed to prohibit faculty opinions on administrative websites.

The regents had previously postponed votes in January and March to address concerns. During today's meeting, Steintrager reiterated his approval of the revised rules, clarifying that they do not ban political or discretionary statements as some critics have claimed.

Regent Richard Leib, who has viewed some student protest chants as antisemitic, criticized the debate over free speech, calling it disingenuous and asserting that the policy is intended to promote transparency.

Most faculty members would prefer adopting the Academic Senate’s 2022 policy, which recommended using softer language like “should” instead of “must” and encouraged departments to solicit opposing views. The Senate’s approach was aimed at self-regulation rather than imposing strict rules.

The regents' new proposal mandates that opinions and political statements be clearly labeled and placed on designated pages rather than department homepages. This change was partly driven by the fact that many academic units had not followed the Senate’s advisory guidance from June 2022.

Some Jewish faculty members have argued that the new rules do not go far enough, advocating for a complete ban on department statements to prevent any perception of the university endorsing political positions. Regent Jay Sures criticized an ethnic studies faculty letter that challenged the UC's labeling of Hamas' actions as terrorism, urging faculty to better understand antisemitism.

The UC Santa Cruz critical race and ethnic studies department’s homepage currently includes a call to end the conflict in Gaza, which the department chair, Felicity Amaya Schaeffer, argues is integral to their academic focus on Palestine. She views the regents' policy as a threat to academic freedom and expertise in ethnic studies.

In contrast, UC San Diego's ethnic studies department has complied with the new guidelines by relocating its political statements to a separate "statements and commentaries" page.

The responsibility to enforce the new policy will fall on academic department leaders, as outlined by Charlie Robinson, general counsel for the UC, during the regents meeting.