Louisiana’s 2 New Free-Expression Laws Target Colleges. They’re Raising Lots of Questions. By Amanda Friedman In the last two weeks, Louisiana has enacted two pieces of legislation that address First Amendment rights on public college campuses. Both laws reflect political movements spearheaded by GOP-dominated state legislatures: the promotion of faith-based education policies and a crackdown on pro-Palestinian protests.
One of the laws — Senate Bill 294 — largely reaffirms campus free-speech rights that are already protected by the First Amendment. But two provisions are sparking confusion: one that specifically excludes criminal activity from colleges’ free-speech policies, and another that prohibits professors from imposing their political beliefs on students.
The other law — House Bill 71 — requires public schools and colleges to display the Ten Commandments in all classrooms, making Louisiana the only state to have such a mandate.
Many students, faculty, and civil-liberties organizations have criticized the laws, arguing they violate constitutional rights. After Gov. Jeff Landry, a Republican, signed the Ten Commandments mandate on Wednesday, the American Civil Liberties Union, the Freedom from Religion Foundation, and other advocacy groups quickly announced they intend to challenge the law.
Republican state leaders and policymakers have defended the new laws. Referring to the Ten Commandments legislation, Landry said he welcomes the legal battles ahead.
At Wednesday’s signing ceremony, the governor put it this way: “If you want to respect the rule of law, you’ve got to start from the original law giver, which was Moses,” Landry said.
The Chronicle reached out to several Louisiana public colleges for comment on how the institutions plan to interpret and comply with both laws. Only Louisiana Tech University responded.
Cami Geisman, a university spokesperson, wrote in an emailed statement that the campus-speech law would require “minor adjustments” to institutional policies, “but they should not affect our method of addressing free speech on our campus.” As for the Ten Commandments law, Geisman said Louisiana Tech soon expects “additional guidance from our management board.”
Senate Bill 294 Louisiana’s campus-speech law adds to a pattern of state legislatures’ proposing bills in response to pro-Palestinian campus protests.
Over the past several months, student protesters have faced criticism for chants that some say veered into antisemitism, prompting legislation, including a U.S. House proposal to expand the definition of antisemitism. Some state lawmakers have gone further, tying pro-Palestinian campus groups to terrorist organizations like Hamas, which activists have denied.
In the spring semester, amid a surge in campus activism, some colleges called in law enforcement to dismantle pro-Palestinian encampments and make arrests. A handful of protests turned violent and caused property damage.
As Valarie Hodges, a Republican state senator, sees it, some of the pro-Palestinian protests crossed a line. That’s why she sponsored SB 294, she said during a legislative hearing in May.
The law excludes criminal activity prohibited by state law from campus free-speech protections. In other words, colleges cannot safeguard acts of civil disobedience — a common tactic for protesters who intentionally violate laws to make a point.
However, that part of the legislation won’t meaningfully affect student protests, as civil disobedience is already against the law, one expert said.
“Ultimately, this bill doesn’t do anything with regard to campus speech,” Jeremy Young, the Freedom to Learn program director at PEN America, a free-speech advocacy organization. “They’re saying that things that were illegal before are still illegal.”
The law also excludes “activities in which an individual or group is being monetarily funded or organized by any individual, corporation, business, or organization that has been designated as a foreign terrorist organization or foreign adversary by the U.S. Dept. of State” from free-speech protections. That provision restates existing federal law, Young said.
Young’s main concern with the Louisiana law involves a provision that states, “no professor shall impose the professor’s political views onto students.”
With the terms “impose” and “political views” not clearly defined in the bill, Young said he’s concerned this ambiguity could lead to government or university officials interpreting them in any way they see fit — potentially resulting in wrongful accusations being made against college faculty and staff.
Young compared SB 294 to Indiana’s House Bill 1179, which he believes was also vaguely written. That legislation, which became law earlier this year, bars campus employees from making public statements in an “official capacity” unless it’s in relation to “the business or operation” of the university or has been approved by the university’s Board of Trustees.
The Indiana law also bars public universities “from using state funds or resources” to “support the activities of a foreign terrorist organization or a state sponsor of terror,” drawing concerns that students who speak out about global conflicts, like the Israel-Hamas war, could face censorship.
To Tyler Coward, lead counsel for government affairs at the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression, the Louisiana law seems to be carefully drafted and only prohibits acts that are already illegal. Concerns about threats to students’ rights hinge on how colleges enforce the law, Coward said.
“If states have an opportunity to codify additional protections in state law for free expression, they can and should do so, so that institutions are fully on notice of what their obligations are,” he said.
House Bill 71 While public colleges revisit their speech policies, they must also make plans to display the Ten Commandments in each classroom by the start of 2025. Experts say the law signifies the most recent effort by conservative policymakers to advance faith-based initiatives and possibly prompt intervention by the U.S. Supreme Court, anticipating a ruling in their favor from the Republican appointees who make up the majority.
The displays can be no smaller than 11-by-14 inches, and the religious text must be “the central focus of the poster,” according to the law. The displays must also feature a four-paragraph statement stating that the Ten Commandments were a “prominent part of American public education for almost three centuries.” State funds are not permitted for implementing the law; the posters will be paid for through donations.
States such as Texas, Oklahoma, and Utah have proposed similar bills in the past, but Louisiana is the only one to succeed in making one law in recent years.
This isn’t the first time laws surrounding the display of religious documents in classrooms have been legally challenged. A 1980 U.S. Supreme Court ruling found that a similar Kentucky law was unconstitutional, violating the establishment clause of the U.S. Constitution, which says Congress can “make no law respecting an establishment of religion.” The court ruled that the law did not have a secular purpose but, instead, served a plainly religious purpose.
“The principle of making sure the government can’t impose religion on citizens has been our barrier against religious division, and is the core, essential condition for religious freedom,” said Charles Haynes, a senior fellow for religious liberty at the Freedom Forum who opposes the Ten Commandments law.
Haynes suggested that courts are more likely to uphold the Louisiana law for public colleges than for K-12 schools. Historically, he said, courts have applied a stricter interpretation of the Constitution’s religious-liberty protections to minors, as they are considered to be more impressionable and vulnerable to coercion. College students are seen as older and mature enough to not be affected by the presence of religious documents, he said.
The law threatens public colleges’ responsibility to welcome students of all religious backgrounds, said J. Celeste Lay, a political science professor at Tulane University who studies education policy. Its fate likely lies with the U.S. Supreme Court, she said.
“It just remains to be seen how far this court is willing to go in overturning long-held precedent on displaying very specifically religious texts in public spaces,” Lay said.
| 
