UNM fails nearly every free speech test
A national higher education watchdog says the University of New Mexico-Albuquerque is falling badly short on free expression, viewpoint diversity and intellectual openness, giving the state’s flagship university credit for just three out of 20 measures in a new campus free speech report card.
The American Council of Trustees and Alumni, or ACTA, released its latest Gold Standard for Freedom of Expression evaluation for UNM on August 18. The report is part of ACTA’s Campus Freedom Initiative, which reviews universities against a 20-point plan the organization says is designed to restore “higher education’s commitment to excellence and open inquiry.”
UNM did not fare well.
According to ACTA, UNM receives credit for only three of the 20 Gold Standard measures. The organization said its research highlights UNM’s strengths in protecting free expression, but also identifies “areas it must work on to improve the student experience.”
The three areas where UNM received credit were limited. ACTA gave the university marks for encouraging student groups devoted to free expression, civil discourse or a plurality of perspectives; establishing policies that protect free expression rights on campus and set clear consequences for disruption of sponsored speakers, events and classes; and reviewing student government policies to ensure viewpoint neutrality in student group recognition and funding.
Everywhere else, according to the report card, UNM came up short.
ACTA says UNM has not adopted the Chicago Principles on Freedom of Expression or a similarly strong statement. It also faults the university for lacking clear free expression expectations in student and faculty handbooks and codes of conduct, failing to include a free expression unit in new-student orientations, and not adopting an institutional neutrality policy such as the Kalven Report.
The watchdog also says UNM does not sponsor campus debates that model civil discourse and does not enforce policies protecting free expression rights with clear consequences for disruptions.
The criticism continues in ACTA’s section on intellectual diversity. UNM received no credit for encouraging presidents, provosts and deans to model respect for a broad range of viewpoints; guaranteeing viewpoint diversity in student life policies; supporting academic centers dedicated to free inquiry and intellectual diversity; or ensuring faculty hiring, evaluation and promotion are based on merit while making clear the institution is open to intellectual diversity.
In the “break down barriers to free expression” category, ACTA says UNM has not eliminated speech and IT policies that have a chilling effect on free expression, has not ensured Title VI, Title VII and Title IX enforcement does not infringe on free expression, and has not disbanded bias response teams.
UNM also received no credit in ACTA’s leadership accountability category. The group says the university has not included free expression commitments in key institutional documents, has not made free expression a criterion in searches and evaluations for top administrators, has not required free expression and viewpoint diversity training for administrative staff, and has not conducted regular surveys to assess the state of free expression and intellectual diversity on campus.
The organization describes itself as launched in 1995 and says it works with alumni, donors, trustees and education leaders to support liberal arts education, high academic standards, the free exchange of ideas and affordable, high-quality college education.
InfluenceWatch describes ACTA as a “conservative-leaning organization” that encourages trustees, alumni and donors to take a more active role in setting university policy. The left-wing Media Bias/Fact Check (so, take this with a grain of salt) rates ACTA as right-biased with “Mixed” factual reporting, citing its conservative advocacy, lack of donor transparency and one-sided reporting, while also noting it has no recorded fact-check failures.
But those caveats do not erase the substance of the UNM report card.
The central finding is straightforward: by ACTA’s standards, UNM has not built a serious institutional framework for free speech, viewpoint diversity or academic neutrality. Instead, the university received credit for only a small handful of procedural protections while failing most of the group’s broader tests for an open campus culture.
For New Mexicans, the report raises obvious questions. If the state’s flagship public university is funded by taxpayers and serves students from across the ideological spectrum, why has it not adopted stronger protections for free expression? Why has it not embraced institutional neutrality? Why are regular campus surveys on intellectual diversity not already standard practice?
ACTA’s report does not accuse UNM of being the worst campus in America. It does something more specific: it measures the university against a detailed free-expression checklist and finds it badly lacking.
In an era when universities increasingly face criticism for ideological conformity, DEI bureaucracy, shout-downs, bias reporting systems and administrative activism, UNM’s 3-out-of-20 score is not a small warning sign.
It is a failing grade from a group that believes universities should be places where ideas are debated, not managed by bureaucracy.