Texas lawmakers have passed a controversial bill that could significantly limit protests on college campuses across the state, following incidents of unrest during pro-Palestinian demonstrations last year.
Senate Bill 2972, which has now been sent to the governor’s desk, empowers university systems’ governing boards to regulate the locations and conditions under which protests can occur.
Supporters of the bill, predominantly Republicans, argue that these measures are essential to prevent disruptions and ensure campus safety.
Critics, however, contend that the new restrictions contradict previous Republican efforts to uphold free speech rights in educational settings, raising concerns over their constitutionality.
The legislation introduces several new rules governing the conduct of student protests.
Protesters will not be permitted to use microphones or other sound amplification devices during class hours if their actions are deemed intimidating or disruptive.
Additionally, protests are banned in common outdoor areas during the last two weeks of the semester if they materially disrupt institutional functions.
Students may not set up encampments, remove institutional flags, or wear disguises to evade identification while protesting.
University officials will also have the authority to require proof of identity from protesters when requested.
The passage of this bill follows a 2019 law mandating that all outdoor areas on college campuses be accessible for protests, a response to specific incidents where events were canceled due to safety concerns.
In 2017, Texas A&M University canceled a planned rally by a white nationalist group, while Texas Southern University withdrew permission for a speech by Representative Briscoe Cain due to challenges related to the event’s organization.
Sen. Joan Huffman, who authored the earlier law and later supported the new restrictions, maintains that both pieces of legislation aim to enhance open dialogue on campuses while ensuring safety.
“Our college students, our future leaders, they should be exposed to all ideas, regardless of their political leanings,” Huffman stated.
The new bill specifically targets practices that have proven contentious in the past.
At the University of Texas at Austin, where significant pro-Palestinian protests occurred last year, students testified against the proposed regulations, citing concerns over their impact on free speech.
During those demonstrations, police arrested over 100 individuals in response to violence that was reported amidst the unrest.
Lawmakers, including Governor Greg Abbott, commended the law enforcement response, particularly in light of an uptick in antisemitism directed towards Jewish students during that period.
Opponents of the bill argue that such legislative measures threaten to undermine students’ rights to protest.
One third-year law student, Gwynn Marotta, expressed fears that the University of Texas has shown a predisposition against free speech, particularly after police intervention in previous protests.
“This bill scares me because the University of Texas has already demonstrated hostility towards free speech when they sent police to arrest students peacefully protesting last spring,” she said.
Marotta urged state leaders to reconsider giving universities the authority to further limit protests on campuses.
The Senate approved the bill with a 21-10 vote without any debate on May 14.
When the House Higher Education Committee convened a last-minute meeting on May 19, students were not given an opportunity to voice their objections before the bill was sent for a vote by the full chamber.
Caro Achar from the American Civil Liberties Union of Texas called the legislative process an alarming indication of the importance of protecting the right to protest.
“People can’t be expected to go through ‘proper’ routes when those routes are quietly closed,” she emphasized.
The initial version of the bill presented in the House had included measures that would have allowed overnight protests at a distance of at least 300 feet from any residence and restricted amplification during class hours solely if the intent was to intimidate.
However, these provisions were ultimately excluded from the final legislation.
Rep. Chris Turner, a Democratic lawmaker, pointed out a significant compromise in the final version, which included language stating that any restrictions on protests must be content neutral and offer alternative means of expression.
“I think what the result is, is a reasonable bill that gives our colleges and universities a couple of additional tools to help them safely manage their campuses while preserving the First Amendment rights of our students, faculty members and anyone else on a college campus or university campus,” Turner remarked before the bill was finalized.
Still, there remained lingering unease among some Democratic senators, including José Menéndez and Sarah Eckhardt, who worried whether the bill included mechanisms for students to contest any imposed restrictions.
Sen. Brandon Creighton, the bill’s author, indicated that there was no formal process for such challenges included in the legislation.
“I’m sure that, from an organic standpoint, that that will happen on its own with an appeal that’s made, but the bill doesn’t, I don’t believe, speak to that,” Creighton said.
Before the bill’s votes, Tyler Coward from the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression criticized the proposed prohibition on overnight protests as unconstitutional.
Both Coward and Achar noted that courts have historically upheld the protection of anonymous speech under the First Amendment.
Some states, including Arizona, have enacted similar measures limiting encampments in response to protest activities, while several universities nationally have unilaterally implemented their own restrictions on protests.
Demands for heightened safety during protests have been echoed at many institutions, a trend that some argue undermines the rights of students to voice dissent.
Creighton clarified that while First Amendment rights must be safeguarded, campus safety is also a significant concern.
“We also want to be mindful of students that may or may not feel safe with such an activity going on campus and finals week overlapping.
There can be some discretion by campus leadership to take action,” he explained.
The tension between ensuring safety and protecting free speech rights remains a contentious topic in Texas as universities navigate the complexities of student expression amid growing national and state-level scrutiny.
image source from：https://www.kwtx.com/2025/06/02/lawmakers-approve-bill-limiting-protests-public-universities/
