Free Speech

Texas Tech's Vague Restrictions Show You Don't Have To Ban Speech To Silence It

If someone is uncertain enough about meaning, they will censor themselves first.

Simon Tam | 7.20.2026 11:30 AM

Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL Add Reason to Google

Media Contact & Reprint Requests

(Photo: James Gabbert/Dreamstime)

Nine years ago this summer, the Supreme Court ruled unanimously in my favor in Matal v. Tam—the case about my band's trademark that most people remember as a fight over offensive speech. It wasn't, really. The government never argued I couldn't call my band The Slants. It argued that officials, not I, got to decide what the name meant. The Court rejected that claim to interpretive authority: "Speech may not be banned on the ground that it expresses ideas that offend."

That fight didn't end in 2017. Once again, public officials are trying to restrict speech protected by the First Amendment by trying to implement vague standards of meaning. 

Faculty at the public Texas Tech University System have been directed to review their course materials, syllabi, and curricula and to make "timely adjustments where needed." Instructors must avoid "advocacy/promotion" of certain viewpoints and keep instruction "neutral," without "compelling students to adopt a particular belief." Materials touching on race, gender identity, or sexual orientation must, in some cases, be submitted for approval before they reach a classroom. There will be a "system-wide phase-out" of programs "centered on" sexual orientation and gender identity, and future graduate theses on those topics face........

© Reason.com