The Violence At Berkeley Exposes A Broader Failure In Higher Education

Two months after the assassination of Charlie Kirk on a college campus in Utah, a Turning Point USA event at the University of California, Berkeley, erupted in violence. Over the course of several hours, protesters tried to shut down the event, launched projectiles at attendees, engaged in physical altercations, and sent one attendee to the hospital. While this rightfully prompted an investigation by the Department of Justice’s Civil Rights Division, the Berkeley riot, and indeed, Kirk’s assassination itself, point to a broader problem: the utter failure of American universities to foster intellectual diversity and a culture of free speech on their campuses.

We saw all of this at Berkeley back in 2017. @UCBerkeley was sued, and settled the case.

The @CivilRights will investigate what happened here, and I see several issues of serious concern regarding campus and local security and Antifa’s ability to operate with impunity in CA. https://t.co/aN7JzouXwl

— AAGHarmeetDhillon (@AAGDhillon) November 11, 2025

One reason Turning Point USA events and other events featuring conservative speakers turn violent is that college students are accustomed to living in ideological echo chambers. A 2024 report by the nonpartisan Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE) demonstrates with raw numbers just how bad the problem is. 55% of conservative faculty (compared to just 17% of liberal faculty) hide their political views to protect their jobs. Just 20% of respondents indicated that a conservative individual would be a somewhat or very positive fit in their department, compared to 71% agreeing that a liberal individual would be a positive addition. 47% of conservative faculty feel they cannot express their opinion on a subject because of how other faculty, students, or administrators would respond. While conservative students may be attending and even teaching classes, often unbeknownst to others, a Turning Point USA event may be the first time many students are exposed to the ideas they have learned to perceive as unacceptable or even evil.

Allowing Turning Point USA to hold events — only after imposing exorbitant security fees and forcing organizers through a Byzantine permitting process — is nowhere near enough. The First Amendment requires as much. Universities have an obligation to their students, and indeed, to the country, to expose students to a broad range of ideas. Rather than let racial diversity drive hiring decisions, universities should strive to ensure that conservative views are represented in social studies and humanities departments. Students should be exposed to the ideas of conservative philosophers, economists, and historians, just as they will invariably be exposed to those of liberal (and even Marxist) thinkers. Universities should cultivate debating societies where participants must advocate positions that differ from their own, and audiences are exposed to competing ideas. And when organizations like Turning Point USA host events, university leaders need not endorse the viewpoints their speakers express, but they should make clear that the speaker is welcome on campus. While a university president attending a Turning Point USA event would likely inflame controversy in the short term, it would send a strong signal that the university’s commitment to intellectual diversity is real.

Fostering open dialogue and the free exchange of ideas is only half the battle. University administrators should adopt zero-tolerance policies for efforts to interfere with others’ speech and learning on college campuses, violent and non-violent alike. Students who engage in violence must be disciplined, up to and including expulsion. Too many universities give students a free pass when their violence relates to a conservative speaker rather than some interpersonal squabble. But engaging in violence to shut down speech makes the conduct worse, not better, as it is inimical to the purpose of a university. Administrators should craft course evaluations that assess whether the instructor fostered a free exchange of ideas and take it seriously when instructors flunk this critical test. Professors who shut down speech or foster self-censorship should adapt to the new norms or find a different profession.

Charlie Kirk’s assassination should have served as a wake-up call to American universities. While the suspect was not a Utah Valley University student, the shooting nonetheless spoke to a broader failure in American higher education. Too many students see conservative viewpoints as tantamount to violence, and those viewpoints are thus seldom expressed. And when they are, such as at Turning Point USA’s recent event in Berkeley, a violent response is all too common. Universities must take action to reverse this erosion of free speech by prioritizing the robust exchange of opposing views and disciplining, rather than coddling, those who exercise a heckler’s veto against conservative speech.

* * *

Jesse Franklin-Murdock is the Miles Visiting Fellow at the Center for American Liberty and a counsel at Dhillon Law Group Inc., where his practice areas include political law and civil rights.

The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.