UF’s new institutional neutrality policy is in effect. Here’s what to know.

The UF Board of Trustees unanimously passed a policy Dec. 5 limiting faculty and staff from using university communication, like email systems, to share their opinions on issues that “polarize society.”

UF is only the latest school to adopt such a policy. Although “statement neutrality” was originally pioneered decades ago, it has spread throughout higher education in the aftermath of the Hamas attack on Israel Oct. 7, 2023, according to a report published by Heterodox Academy in 2025. More than 148 universities now have institutional neutrality policies nationwide. 

At UF, which was the first Florida university to adopt the policy — with the University of West Florida following suit shortly afterward — some faculty have already spoken against what some view as a breach of First Amendment rights.

UF Interim President Donald Landry first mentioned the concept in October by telling the UF Faculty Senate he would maintain institutional neutrality in reference to the death of conservative activist Charlie Kirk and the two-year anniversary of the Hamas attack. He advised faculty to do the same. At a Nov. 20 meeting, he again mentioned an institutional neutrality “initiative.”

“Leadership, when it makes pronouncements on things that are not essential to the university, divides the faculty — those inside versus those outside — divides the students,” Landry said. “[It] suppresses the very conversation we want to encourage.”

Landry was a no-show at the Dec. 9 faculty senate meeting, during which the group was set to discuss the policy. At this meeting, many staff members expressed confusion regarding the new policy passed earlier that week, including what faculty it applied to and the extent to which the policy would affect them.

Where did institutional neutrality originate? 

The University of Chicago introduced the concept of institutional neutrality in its 1967 Kalven Report written at the height of Vietnam War protests and amid criticism of the university’s investments in apartheid-era South Africa.

The report questions how a university should respond to social or political issues without jeopardizing student and faculty’s right to free speech. Its conclusion: A university should, in most cases, not comment on those issues.

Institutional neutrality policies give students and faculty more freedom to express their opinions on important issues without fear of retribution from the university, the report argued.

The Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression frequently praises universities for adopting institutional neutrality in line with the Kalven Report. However, in a Dec. 16 report, the organization criticized UF’s implementation of the principle. 

“A University of Florida ‘Institutional Neutrality’ policy threatens to put leaders’ thumbs on the scales of debate and chill faculty and student voices,” the report said. 

The criticism refers to a section of the policy that bans UF leaders from speaking on issues not directly related to the university’s “mission, governance, or operations” while conducting university business. It applies to members of “institutional or unit leadership teams,” though it’s still unclear which faculty fall into those categories.

The policy said only the president, in consultation with the board chair, has the power to make these statements.

UF Interim President Landry clarified this aspect of the policy in a Dec. 9 email to faculty, writing that such statements should only be issued “if the issue [is] of importance to the core mission of the university.”

The email also emphasized the rights of faculty to free speech. 

“To be clear, you as university employees still retain the right to express your own opinions, provided you don’t use UF communication resources to do so or state or imply the university’s endorsements of those opinions,” the email said.  

What are faculty and experts saying?

One complaint from faculty was the policy’s vagueness. 

Jane Bambauer, a UF professor of journalism and law, said she supports institutional neutrality in theory, but she believes the specifics of UF’s policy raise First Amendment concerns. 

“Employees who might be worried about discipline might worry that they don’t know what the university will construe as bonafide academic discussion,” she said. “So, they might get nervous even about commenting on things within their expertise.”

UF Spokesperson Steve Orlando said the university is working on a webpage to address questions faculty and staff may have about the policy.

Steve McGuire, the head of the American Council of Trustees and Alumni’s Campus Freedom Initiative, which grades universities on their commitment to freedom of expression, said UF’s policy is “very detailed as a sort of uniquely crafted policy on institutional neutrality.”

Some schools choose to directly adopt the Kalven Report, but UF chose a different route and created its own policy, he said. 

“Overall, it looks quite good to me,” McGuire said. 

However, he also expressed concern over possible overreach, particularly restrictions preventing faculty from sharing opinions through university email systems even when those views are not publicly disseminated. 

This piece was originally published by The Independent Florida Alligator on January 11, 2026.