On May 1, 2026, Tennessee governor Bill Lee signed into law the “Charlie Kirk Act,” prohibiting the state’s public colleges and universities from disinviting campus speakers, among other stipulations.
The Act (Senate Bill 1741/House Bill 1476) prohibits public higher education institutions, faculty members, or agents of the institutions from “[r]efusing to invite a speaker because of the viewpoints expressed or espoused by the speaker or canceling an invitation of the speaker to speak at the institution in response to threatened protests or opposition from students or faculty.” The law further prohibits higher education institutions from preventing student organizations from inviting their choice of speakers or restricting a student organization in its choice of invited speakers. The law contains no exceptions and applies to any invited speaker; it says nothing about how the university may or should respond to protests by individuals from outside of the campus community or to security threats. Higher education institutions who break the law may be subject to a writ of mandamus or injunction requiring them to comply. A faculty member or agent of the institution who breaks the law may be subject to civil liability. The law specifies that invited speakers, audience members, student groups, or faculty members have standing for private civil enforcement against a faculty member or agent of the institution who breaks the law.
Scholars at Risk is concerned about state interference into university decision-making on matters of discourse on campus. While the law purports to protect discourse, its sweeping terms and lack of procedural safeguards expose institutions, administrators, faculty, and other “agents” of an institution (possibly including students), acting in good faith, to liability, harassment, or other sanctions. For example, the law makes no distinction between assessments of qualification and quality of prospective speakers, biased viewpoint-based exclusions of prospective speakers, and legitimate security concerns. Rather than protect discourse, as written the law usurps the curatorial role of higher education communities to shape campus discourse in ways that members of the community determine are most suited to the production and dissemination of knowledge for the public good, undermining institutional autonomy, academic freedom, and freedom of expression.
Sources:
https://www.insidehighered.com/news/students/free-speech/2026/04/21/tenn-passes-charlie-kirk-act-defending-campus-speakers
https://www.thecentersquare.com/tennessee/article_cd0b8aeb-1605-494c-865c-8a620d461370.html
https://www.wkrn.com/news/tennessee-politics/charlie-kirk-act-passed/
https://pen.org/press-release/tennessees-charlie-kirk-act-poses-a-threat-to-campus-free-speech/
https://www.fire.org/news/victory-fire-supported-campus-speech-bill-signed-law-tennessee-governor
https://wapp.capitol.tn.gov/apps/BillInfo/Default?BillNumber=SB1741&ga=114
https://www.capitol.tn.gov/Bills/114/Bill/SB1741.pdf