WashU ranked 72nd out of 257 colleges in the 2026 Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE) College Free Speech Rankings survey, with an overall “D- speech climate grade.” This represents an improvement from the 187th rank in 2024, albeit with a slightly revised grading system. The grade was lowered by criteria such as Administrative Support and Political Tolerance, which both received an F rating. 

WashU formally adopted the Chicago Statement of Free Speech in 2016, a national model for protecting open dialogue, and an institutional neutrality policy with Vanderbilt University, which lays out that excellence, academic freedom & free expression, and growth & development together affirm the university’s commitment to knowledge creation, neutral inquiry, and inclusive opportunity as core to its identity and mission. Both the Chicago Statement and institutional neutrality are new factors influencing FIRE’s rankings this year. WashU’s overall score was 60.9 out of 100 — up 4.3 points from 2024.

While the University’s formal policies earned it a “yellow light” rating, meaning its written regulations only pose limited restrictions on speech, student responses to the survey pointed to a more complicated reality. According to the report, 43% of students reported self-censoring once or twice a month, and three in four students believe it is acceptable to shout down a speaker under certain circumstances. One third of survey participants said that using violence to stop someone from speaking could be justified.

FIRE surveyed 303 Washington University undergraduates out of an estimated enrollment of 8,100. The survey was part of a national sample of more than 68,000 students across 257 institutions conducted in partnership with College Pulse. FIRE uses these responses, combined with an analysis of university policies and campus speech controversies, to assign each school its score. 

A recent The Chronicle of Higher Education article by Harvard professor of government, Ryan D. Enos, argues that FIRE’s college free speech rankings use an “arbitrary and misleading” methodology that exaggerates problems at prominent universities. 

Enos writes that FIRE’s system combines student surveys, policy reviews, and incident penalties into a single score that “has no natural meaning” and can be manipulated to produce sensational headlines. He suggests the rankings have been “weaponized by critics of America’s universities” and do not reliably measure the true quality of campus speech climates.

Senior Elena Wierich, president of WashU College Democrats, said she sees both sides of the issue in regards to FIRE’s methodology.

 “I don’t know what type of students are responding to the survey. I wouldn’t be surprised if conservative students responded to those surveys more, but part of it also has to come from the student body being accepting of people who have different views,” she said.

A second-year law student, who chose to remain anonymous due to fear of reputational consequences, said that she felt like racist speech was more protected than liberal-leaning viewpoints.   

“People who have been critical of Charlie Kirk or Israel or Trump’s immigration policies are met with harsher criticism than those people who, for example, said blatantly racist things during BLM Protests in 2020,” they said.

While talking about the 2024 pro-Palestinian protests that she was a part of, she said that the police presence suppressed freedom of expression.  

“[At] the Palestinian protests, where tens of students were arrested, it was under the idea that it was antisemitic when it wasn’t. Having a heightened police presence when it’s your students protesting discourages protesting. I don’t see students utilizing Mudd field as they once did,” they said. 

Chancellor Andrew D. Martin has emphasized WashU’s commitment to open dialogue in his past statements on free speech. During the 2020 election cycle in October, he wrote that “diverse perspectives help us learn, grow, and uncover knowledge in a way that homogeneity simply cannot.” 

After protests for Palestine in 2024, Martin said some of the protesters’ actions ran counter to university values.

“We never want to have this type of interaction with members of our community or our neighbors,” Martin wrote. 

Following the Palestine encampment in April of 2024, which included over 100 arrests, including those of 23 WashU students, WashU faced criticism related to the suppression of free speech. However, Martin defended the arrests, writing in a university-wide email that they were necessary to maintain order. 

“They chose to stay and be arrested,” Martin wrote. 

Dean of Students Rob Wild said the University’s goal is to make sure all students feel heard, regardless of their opinions.

“As Dean of Students, my personal views don’t matter. I am here to support all of our students, and I would hope all my colleagues at the University would approach their work with students the same way that we want to hear from students.” Wild said. “Our commitment is that all voices and viewpoints should be heard here.”

He pointed to the Dialogues Across Difference program, launched in the Spring of 2023, as a meaningful step toward encouraging communication.

“One of the best innovations of the last five years at WashU has really been our Dialogue Across Difference program,” Wild said. “We’ve tried to create smaller spaces where students can connect with one another in a way that’s more comfortable for them; to get to know one another but also [to] be in actual dialogue.”

Despite those efforts, some students still say that they are cautious when it comes to expressing their views. Senior Ben Faden, a philosophy student, said he sees openness in classrooms but tension among his peers.

 “My professors strive to create environments where people are comfortable sharing opinions,” Faden said. “I don’t think the administration is limiting free speech; it’s more of a student body culture,” he said. 

Faden referred to an incident in 2022 involving a conservative speaker, Amala Ekpunobi, in which Ekpunobi received considerable condemnation from the student body.

 “People didn’t want the speaker here,” he said. “That’s not the administration’s fault, it’s just where the student body stood.”

Another student viewed the administration’s hands-off approach differently. Sophomore Courtney Lucas II said he feels the University’s caution has turned into avoidance.

“When different opinions start to threaten the WashU image, that’s when the administration steps in and shuts things down,” he said. “They kind of want to avoid any beliefs they view as radical, even if those beliefs are just baseline political views.” 

Another student, first-year Joshitha Bodavula, said that she felt her peers avoided discussing uncomfortable topics. 

“People are very skittish when it comes to topics of discomfort,” Bodavula said. “When something’s uncomfortable to talk about, it never gets brought up.” 

Bodavula also criticized the lack of institutional representation for all people in the WashU community, referencing WashU’s alteration of DEI-related content across its websites. 

“When the institution isn’t representing how you want the community to look, then we’re already off to a bad story,” she said. 

FIRE’s report supports these perceptions. WashU scored poorly in “Comfort Expressing Ideas” and “Administrative Support,” with D- and F grades, respectively. 

In contrast, its “Openness” score was somewhat stronger, indicating students may appreciate diverse ideas even if they feel unable to voice their own.

Reflecting on this, Lucas mentioned the Trump administration’s recent immigration crackdowns, saying the University seems hesitant to make strong public statements on social or political issues for fear of backlash.

“WashU continuing not to be an advocate in any sense is showing that they’re neglecting those students and their families and their rights,” he said. “Saying ‘You are welcome, and we want you here’ shouldn’t be politicized, but somehow it is.”

Wierich also pointed to the University’s policies that restrict certain types of political speakers. 

“Any kind of political speaker can’t be a candidate running for office,” Wierich said. “We’ve run into problems bringing in speakers, and the events we can do become limited.”

Still, Wierich said she has seen students take initiative to make their voices heard. She cited recent vigils for both Israel and Palestine, as well as a podcast created by two conservative students. 

“We’ve seen examples of students being able to express themselves,” she said. 

Wild said the administration has worked to create systems for students who feel their voices are being limited.

“We have all kinds of different ways, systems we’ve developed, where students can report situations where they feel like they are not allowed to freely express their views in a way that aligns with the University’s policies,” he said.

The FIRE report cited one major speech controversy involving Dr. Seth Crosby, a faculty member who alleged he was dismissed after posting on X about the Hamas attack on Israel in October 2023. FIRE listed the incident as a negative mark, arguing it raised concerns about faculty expression and administrative overreach. 

FIRE’s data also showed that WashU’s student body leans heavily liberal, with roughly five liberal students for every one conservative. That imbalance can make it harder for dissenting opinions to surface, particularly in classroom settings or campus discussions.

Some students, however, see this as a broader reflection of WashU’s academic focus.

 “I don’t think universities should be politicized. We come here to learn, and that’s what we should do,” sophomore Arieh Robinson said.

Wierich said the culture at WashU trends more apolitical than at other universities.

 “I find that overly political speech is discouraged just because of the emphasis on professional development,” she said.

Wierich said she believes there is room for improvement in the free speech environment.

“Learning from other people’s lived experiences and differences, that’s what universities — which historically have been beacons of freedom of speech, innovation, and community building and organizing — should do,” she said. “I don’t think that’s happening now, but I think we have the ability to do better.”

WashU College Republicans did not return requests for comment.