- Details
- By Professor Victoria Sutton
Guest Opinion. The concept of a university is for the free exchange of ideas, where new knowledge can be built, discovered and developed. The first university still in operation today is the University of Bologna (Italy) established around 1180. Then a group of students and faculty left the University of Bologna to form the University of Padua (Italy, 1222) becoming the second oldest university still operating in Italy and the fifth oldest in the western world. Notably, one can still stand at the podium where Galileo taught as a faculty member.The University of Bologna was granted a special status by Emperor Barbarossa, and the University of Bologna was eventually supported by taxpayers, becoming one of the first public universities.
The motivation for these universities was for the free exchange of ideas and gaining knowledge in the scientific arts, law and medicine. Learning, teaching and research have become the three pillars of academic pursuits in modern universities today.
But all of this was not without some painful deviations from its idealistic goals. Copernicus, an alumnus of the University of Padua, developed the theory that placed the sun at the center of the universe. This created serious controversy because it challenged the Catholic Church’s position that Earth was the center of the university. Galileo supported this theory which also led to his house arrest.
So the university has always been immersed in society, politics and religion because the work has relevance to all of these. The scientific method codified by Sir Frances Bacon in 1620 uses the development of a hypothesis, an experimental design, the collection of data, and its empirical analysis as a way to neutralize experimenter bias. It has continued to be the cornerstone of scientific publications, grants for scientific research and the reputation of universities.
The University’s Contribution
America brought the university to the next level with the broadest Free Speech freedoms in the world. The free exchange of ideas and the ability to understand the other viewpoint enough to respond and debate the idea is critical to this exchange.
Teaching students to understand and debate those ideas is also critical and when faculties no longer offer ideas that can be debated, the university loses that unique characteristic that has made the institution a great contribution to society.
Universities have been criticized for hiring professors with the same liberal viewpoint while avoiding hiring conservative professors, evidenced by the current 90% liberal faculty and 9% conservative faculty divide. Scholar, David Horowitz, who went from a Marxist to a neoconservative, argued that universities were damaged by this imbalance of viewpoints. Others argue that while serving as a Republican professor they have not experienced the predicted prejudice or bias against them. In one study, the researchers found that only 7% of conservative faculty felt they were discriminated against; while 8% of democrat faculty felt the same. So from this, we might conclude it is not the personal political viewpoint of the professor that mars the development of students’ analytical skill building, but rather whether the professor is able to have a discussion that reflects both viewpoints, counterpoints and further counterpoints.
Universities can create an environment of welcoming viewpoints, but because faculty plan their own lectures and courses and have academic freedom, another form of free speech, it is ultimately up to faculty to create an environment where discussions of ideas can be had.
An Executive Order in 2025, established that funding would be contingent on universities protection of First Amendment, Free Speech protection, without using the “misinformation”, “disinformation” basis for blocking Free Speech.
Free Speech
The Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment, ensures that we can do that. The university is a place for the free exchange of ideas, limited only by time, place and manner; obscenity, special protection of children and speech that incites violence.
The First Amendment of the Constitution reads as follows:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
We do have one of the broadest rights to free speech in the world.
Societal trends toward blocking viewpoints to the point of murdering the proponent of them, is nothing new. The Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. and President John F. Kennedy were both murdered for their political viewpoints and there were parts of society that celebrated their deaths because they disagreed with their viewpoints. The dehumanizing response to political assassination is also nothing new, and likely not to change.
However, we could do better as a society.
Leading us out of the darkness
Universities stand to be the most influential in leading us out of the darkness — culminating in the incident of the assassination of Charlie Kirk, a conservative speaker appearing on the campus of a university in Utah, this week. While he was conservative in his viewpoints, he was famously open to debating with any other viewpoint, openly in a public forum.
The university should also be on the front lines of demanding more for treatment of students with mental illnesses. According to some research, 75% of lifetime mental illnesses occur by the age of 24, exactly the period when students are in the university experience.It is senseless that universities due to real fears of liability, HIPPA privacy requirements that are often misunderstood and bad publicity, cannot help identify students who need treatment for mental illness and are left to simply dismissing them — essentially kicking the can down the road for an unmet need for society.
Should I dare say, it could be a turning point for universities and faculty to rise to the occasion to ensure that true free speech and the exchange of ideas with all viewpoints should be practiced in the classroom and in the public forum — but they also need the support of all aspects of the society they serve.
To read more articles by Professor Sutton go to: https://profvictoria.substack.
Professor Victoria Sutton (Lumbee) is Director of the Center for Biodefense, Law & Public Policy and an Associated Faculty Member of The Military Law Center of Texas Tech University School of Law.
Help us tell the stories that could save Native languages and food traditions
At a critical moment for Indian Country, Native News Online is embarking on our most ambitious reporting project yet: "Cultivating Culture," a three-year investigation into two forces shaping Native community survival—food sovereignty and language revitalization.
The devastating impact of COVID-19 accelerated the loss of Native elders and with them, irreplaceable cultural knowledge. Yet across tribal communities, innovative leaders are fighting back, reclaiming traditional food systems and breathing new life into Native languages. These aren't just cultural preservation efforts—they're powerful pathways to community health, healing, and resilience.
Our dedicated reporting team will spend three years documenting these stories through on-the-ground reporting in 18 tribal communities, producing over 200 in-depth stories, 18 podcast episodes, and multimedia content that amplifies Indigenous voices. We'll show policymakers, funders, and allies how cultural restoration directly impacts physical and mental wellness while celebrating successful models of sovereignty and self-determination.
This isn't corporate media parachuting into Indian Country for a quick story. This is sustained, relationship-based journalism by Native reporters who understand these communities. It's "Warrior Journalism"—fearless reporting that serves the 5.5 million readers who depend on us for news that mainstream media often ignores.
We need your help right now. While we've secured partial funding, we're still $450,000 short of our three-year budget. Our immediate goal is $25,000 this month to keep this critical work moving forward—funding reporter salaries, travel to remote communities, photography, and the deep reporting these stories deserve.
Every dollar directly supports Indigenous journalists telling Indigenous stories. Whether it's $5 or $50, your contribution ensures these vital narratives of resilience, innovation, and hope don't disappear into silence.
The stakes couldn't be higher. Native languages are being lost at an alarming rate. Food insecurity plagues many tribal communities. But solutions are emerging, and these stories need to be told.
Support independent Native journalism. Fund the stories that matter.
Levi Rickert (Potawatomi), Editor & Publisher