{"id":5607,"date":"2026-02-04T01:56:20","date_gmt":"2026-02-04T01:56:20","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/journals.law.unc.edu\/firstamendmentlawreview\/?p=5607"},"modified":"2026-02-04T01:56:20","modified_gmt":"2026-02-04T01:56:20","slug":"hark-the-sound-of-tarheel-voices-free-speech-rights-for-faculty-at-public-institutions","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/journals.law.unc.edu\/firstamendmentlawreview\/hark-the-sound-of-tarheel-voices-free-speech-rights-for-faculty-at-public-institutions\/","title":{"rendered":"\u201cHark the Sound of Tarheel Voices\u201d: Free Speech Rights for Faculty at Public Institutions"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

By: Seth Moore<\/a>, Vol. 24 Staff Writer<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In September 2025, UNC placed<\/a> Professor Dwayne Dixon on administrative leave. Not only did this action spark outrage among some students. Ultimately, UNC reinstated<\/a> Dixon a few days later, but this situation raised a recurring question: what are the rights of university faculty regarding free speech?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Professors and the First Amendment<\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

University faculty\u2019s speech is often protected under \u201cacademic freedom.\u201d Academic freedom is the concept that faculty have the right<\/a> to \u201cteach, research, and speak about matters of public concern without being punished.\u201d There is value in this concept because it allows faculty to explore academic interests that may be taboo and challenge students with difficult topics.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Though, academic freedom is not limitless. In 2006, the Supreme Court held in Garcetti v. Caballos<\/em><\/a> that public employees were not protected by the First Amendment for speech they make within their \u201cofficial duties.\u201d However, the Court carved out an exception<\/a> for \u201cspeech related to scholarship or teaching.\u201d This exception has allowed circuit courts across the country to interpret what protections faculty speech is afforded.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

But, what about speech that is not made in a faculty member\u2019s official capacity? In 1968, the Supreme Court held in Pickering v. Board of Education<\/em><\/a> that a teacher cannot be punished for speaking on a matter of public concern. The case established a balancing test<\/a> that weighed \u201cthe interests of the teacher, as a citizen, in commenting upon matters of public concern\u201d against \u201cthe interest of the state, as an employer, in promoting the efficiency of the public services it performs through its employees.\u201d Essentially, government employers are limited in regulating private speech of public employees when those employees are speaking on a \u201dmatter of public concern.\u201d A \u201cmatter of public concern\u201d is typically recognized<\/a> as being speech \u201crelating to any matter of political, social, or other concern to the community.\u201d Generally, unprotected speech<\/a> includes incitement of unlawful action, true threats, obscenity, fighting words, and defamation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Professor Dwayne Dixon and UNC <\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

As a public university, the First Amendment applies<\/a> to UNC, and as such, faculty enjoy the First Amendment protections stated above. So, what led to Dixon being placed on administrative leave? The University placed Dixon on administrative leave after concerns<\/a> over allegations that he advocated for politically motivated violence.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Dixon is reported<\/a> to be involved with a group called \u201cRedneck Revolt,\u201d an organization dedicated to being a \u201cpro-worker, anti-racist\u201d group. The issue was that Redneck Revolt had allegedly<\/a> been involved with another organization, the John Brown Gun Club, that had previously engaged in at least two attacks on ICE facilities. In the wake of Charlie Kirk\u2019s assassination, the Club posted<\/a> flyers at Georgetown University that were removed for concerns of political violence. The flyers consisted of statements<\/a> such as \u201cHey fascist! Catch this!\u201d and \u201cThe only political group that celebrates when Nazis die.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This connection, combined with Dixon\u2019s past behavior became a concern. In 2017, Dixon was arrested<\/a> in Durham, NC for possessing a semi-automatic rifle at an anti-KKK rally. Though, the charges were dismissed. In 2018, Dixon was charged with assault in connection to protests over the Silent Sam statute at UNC. These charges were also dismissed.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Overall, given the case law, Dixon is protected by the First Amendment and cannot be punished for his private conduct unless it amounts to unprotected speech. If the allegations are true and Dixon was involved in advocating for political violence, it is unlikely that kind of speech would be protected and thus UNC would be able to act. However, if all Dixon is guilty of is advocating for political positions that, although perhaps extreme, do not constitute unprotected speech, action likely cannot be taken against him for his views. Concerns over a professor\u2019s rhetoric are understandable, but until that professor engages in unprotected behaviors, recourse is limited because of the constitutional protections set forth by the First Amendment and the Supreme Court.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Conclusion<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The situation with Dixon is an interesting insight into faculty speech rights at universities. No matter one\u2019s personal opinion of Dixon\u2019s conduct and private associations, his situation is a good refresher of the First Amendment\u2019s scope on university campuses.\u00a0 Situations like these are not limited to left-leaning professors. Conservative faculty also experience retaliation<\/a> of their own for their speech.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The takeaway is that university faculty, particularly faculty at public universities, enjoy First Amendment protections, but those protections are not limitless. Of course, these protections are not always popular, but they exist to allow professors from various backgrounds and across the political spectrum to contribute to the core function of universities to be a free marketplace of ideas.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

By: Seth Moore, Vol. 24 Staff Writer In September 2025, UNC placed Professor Dwayne Dixon on administrative leave. Not only did this action spark outrage among some students. Ultimately, UNC reinstated Dixon a few days later, but this situation raised a recurring question: what are the rights of university faculty regarding free speech? Professors and …<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":10,"featured_media":5604,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[396,400],"tags":[133,152],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.unc.edu\/firstamendmentlawreview\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5607"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.unc.edu\/firstamendmentlawreview\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.unc.edu\/firstamendmentlawreview\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.unc.edu\/firstamendmentlawreview\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/10"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.unc.edu\/firstamendmentlawreview\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=5607"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.unc.edu\/firstamendmentlawreview\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5607\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":5608,"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.unc.edu\/firstamendmentlawreview\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5607\/revisions\/5608"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.unc.edu\/firstamendmentlawreview\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/5604"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.unc.edu\/firstamendmentlawreview\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=5607"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.unc.edu\/firstamendmentlawreview\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=5607"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.unc.edu\/firstamendmentlawreview\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=5607"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}