Ranking Member Cassidy Requests Answers over Stanford University’s Failure to Protect Free Speech on Campus

WASHINGTON – Today, U.S. Senator Bill Cassidy, M.D. (R-LA), ranking member of the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions (HELP) Committee, raised concerns about Stanford University’s failure to protect freedom of speech after a student-led protest disrupted an event headlined by Judge Kyle Duncan, who serves on U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. Judge Duncan was originally invited by the Stanford Law School’s Federalist Society to discuss his views on Fifth Circuit cases that were before the Supreme Court for review. Upon arrival, Judge Duncan and the students who wished to attend the event were heckled, and Judge Duncan was unable to issue his remarks. When Tirien Steinbach, the Associate Dean for Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI), eventually intervened, she read a prepared statement criticizing Judge Duncan’s judicial philosophy and issuing support for the protestors.

Under Stanford University policy, freedom of speech and assembly is protected during any university-related event or activity. Additionally, Stanford’s Student Handbook prevents faculty, staff or students from “disrupt[ing] the effective carrying out of a University function or approved activity.” Despite the clear violations of university policy, at least five Stanford Law faculty members reportedly stood by and allowed hecklers to obstruct the proceedings. While Stanford leaders have issued a formal apology to Judge Duncan for the incident, to date no faculty or students have faced repercussions for their violations of university policy. 

“The treatment of Judge Duncan by Stanford Law School (SLS) staff and students violated Stanford’s stated commitment to freedom of expression, and raises serious questions about free speech and viewpoint diversity at one of America’s premier law schools,” wrote Dr. Cassidy.

“The incident on SLS campus is the latest in a string of instances involving invited speakers being shouted down, silenced, or driven out of prominent law schools for their political viewpoints. It is a disturbing trend that runs contrary to the very intellectual inquiry that academies are intended to foster.” continued Dr. Cassidy. “In order to better understand how Stanford is remedying this situation, I ask that you answer the following questions on a question-by-question basis by April 3, 2023.”

Dear President Lavigne and Dean Martinez:

I write regarding the recent troubling events on Stanford Law School’s (SLS) campus relating to a speaking engagement at which Judge Kyle Duncan of the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit was an invited guest. When Judge Duncan appeared at a March 9, 2023, event hosted by the SLS Federalist Society, he was heckled by students, harangued by SLS’ Associate Dean for Diversity, Equity and Inclusion, and ultimately prevented from delivering his prepared remarks.^[1] The treatment of Judge Duncan by SLS staff and students violated Stanford’s stated commitment to freedom of expression, and raises serious questions about free speech and viewpoint diversity at one of America’s premier law schools.

According to Stanford’s Statement on Academic Freedom, Stanford “assures the fullest protection of inquiry, thought, expression, publication and peaceable assembly [on campus].”^[2] It goes on to say,  “[e]xpression of the widest range of viewpoints should be encouraged, free from institutional orthodoxy and from internal or external coercion.”^[3] Stanford’s Student Handbook also provides that it is a violation of university policy for “a member of the faculty, staff, or student body to . . . [p]revent or disrupt the effective carrying out of a University function or approved activity.”^[4] The conduct of SLS students, faculty, and administrators at the March 9 event with Judge Duncan fell far short of these important and laudable commitments.

As part of its efforts to invite distinguished scholars and jurists to speak to SLS students, the SLS Federalist Society invited Judge Duncan to offer his views regarding opinions issued by the Fifth Circuit that are on review before the United States Supreme Court.^[5] Judge Duncan’s experience also gave him the ability to discuss constitutional interpretation with members of the student body. Prior to his confirmation on the Fifth Circuit, Judge Duncan had a distinguished career as an appellate litigator, with experience before multiple appellate courts and state supreme courts.^[6] Judge Duncan also has the distinction of having argued twice before the United States Supreme Court.^[7] SLS students undoubtedly had much to learn from hearing Judge Duncan speak.

Unfortunately, SLS students were denied that opportunity on March 9. When Judge Duncan arrived for the scheduled event, students stood outside the entrance of the lecture hall where the event was being held to ridicule students as they entered.^[8] When the Federalist Society President opened the proceedings, he was mocked.^[9] Judge Duncan himself was heckled by members of the audience and prevented from speaking.^[10] To make matters worse, SLS faculty members allowed the heckling and obstruction to continue, despite Judge Duncan’s continued attempts to speak.^[11]

When Tirien Steinbach, the SLS Associate Dean for Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI), finally intervened, she failed to uphold the basic principles of free speech embodied in Stanford’s Statement on Academic Freedom. Instead, Associate Dean Steinbach delivered her own prepared remarks, during which she lectured and harangued Judge Duncan. Associate Dean Steinbach questioned whether freedom of thought and expression should be sacrificed when it causes disagreement.^[12] She then concluded her remarks by encouraging the hecklers who disrupted Judge Duncan, stating “I’m really grateful to be in this institution. I look out and I don’t ask ‘what is going here?’ I look out and I say, ‘I’m glad this is going on here.’”^[13] Judge Duncan eventually left without delivering all of his prepared remarks.^[14]

Following the March 9 incident, Dean Martinez issued a letter to students characterizing Associate Dean Steinbach’s behavior as “well-intentioned” and her attempts at managing the room as simply having “went awry.”^[15] Eventually, you both issued a formal apology to Judge Duncan stating that “[s]taff members who should have enforced university policies [on free speech] failed to do so, and instead intervened in inappropriate ways that are not aligned with the university’s commitment to free speech” while assuring Judge Duncan that SLS leadership was “taking steps to ensure something like this does not happen again.”^[16]

The incident on SLS campus is the latest in a string of instances involving invited speakers being shouted down, silenced, or driven out of prominent law schools for their political viewpoints.^[17] It is a disturbing trend that runs contrary to the very intellectual inquiry that academies are intended to foster. It is especially troubling that this trend has taken hold in America’s law schools, which are tasked with preparing the next generation of lawyers and jurists to engage critically with arguments of all types, including those with which they may disagree. In order to better understand how Stanford is remedying this situation, I ask that you answer the following questions on a question-by-question basis by April 3, 2023.

1. Please describe the steps Stanford University and SLS are taking to investigate potential wrongdoing relating to the March 9, 2023 SLS Federalist Society event at which Judge Duncan was invited to speak.

2. Will Stanford University and SLS investigate potential wrongdoing by faculty and administrators in attendance at the March 9, 2023 event who made no effort to intervene in support of Judge Duncan’s ability to speak? If not, why not?

3. Please describe the steps the university will take to hold those found to have violated the university’s policies in connection with the March 9, 2023 event accountable for their actions.

4. Please describe the actions Stanford University and SLS are taking, or intend to take, in the wake of the March 9, 2023 event to ensure that in the future, conservative student organizations and the guests they invite to speak on Stanford University’s campus are neither harassed nor intimidated.

5. Has Stanford University and SLS apologized to members of the SLS Federalist Society for the way they were treated by university employees? If not, does the university intend to issue such an apology?

6. Do you believe it was appropriate for Acting Associate Dean Merino to advise Federalist Society students to pause their social media accounts, given the concerns over free speech the event engendered? If not, why not?

Thank you for your prompt attention to this matter.