‘The right to be safe as a right to feel safe’: Trump exploits progressive safetyism to crush campus protests

President Donald Trump has launched an extensive attack on free speech rights in America, particularly targeting pro-Palestinian demonstrations on college campuses. This crackdown represents the most significant threat to free speech since the McCarthy era, with universities facing pressure to suppress student protests.

According to MSNBC, the response from Democratic leaders and progressive institutions has been notably weak, with many universities quickly complying with Trump’s demands. This includes prestigious institutions like Columbia University, which has implemented strict measures against pro-Palestinian protesters despite their largely peaceful nature.

Brown University political scientist Alex Gourevitch explains how the concept of “safetyism” has been weaponized against student protesters. The transformation from “the right to be safe as a right to feel safe” has become a powerful tool for suppressing political dissent, particularly in university settings.

How universities became battlegrounds for free speech

Data shows that most pro-Palestinian student demonstrations between October 2023 and May 2024 were nonviolent, focusing primarily on calls for policy changes regarding Gaza and university divestment from Israel. However, these protests faced severe crackdowns, often resulting in more arrests than during the Vietnam War era demonstrations.

Columbia University has become the epicenter of this conflict. The institution employed its 2022 administrative apparatus, which emphasizes “holistic well-being” and “inclusion,” to discipline students. This approach proved more restrictive than older conduct codes that were specifically designed to protect political expression.

Trump has intensified pressure on universities by threatening investigations under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. This law requires federally funded universities to address discriminatory harassment and hostile environments on campus. Despite Columbia’s existing measures against antisemitism and strict protest regulations, the university yielded to Trump’s demands.

The situation has exposed how progressive concepts like “safe spaces,” which originated in gay liberation and feminist movements of the 1960s, have evolved into tools for censorship. These ideas, combined with modern mental health awareness, have been appropriated to justify restrictions on political speech and assembly.

Democratic lawmakers have struggled to mount an effective response, partly due to their own history of supporting restrictions on pro-Palestinian speech and backing legislation against the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement. This precedent has made it difficult for them to defend free speech rights when they conflict with pro-Israel positions.