Introduction
For generations, Americans assumed that sending a child to college was the safest financial decision a family could make. Today, that assumption deserves far more scrutiny. For many students, college remains an excellent investment. For others, it may become the biggest financial mistake of their lives.
In <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/why-americas-colleges-are-far-more-fragile-than-they-appear-part-i?row=0&amp;elementPosition=1&amp;rowType=Web+Search+Overlay" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Parts I</a> and <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/why-americas-colleges-are-far-more-fragile-than-they-appear-part-ii?row=0&amp;elementPosition=4&amp;rowType=Web+Search+Overlay" target="_blank" rel="noopener">II</a> of &#8220;Why America’s Colleges Are Far More Fragile Than They Appear,&#8221; we were descriptive, outlining the mounting financial pressures facing colleges and universities, pressures that have reshaped the economics of higher education in ways families can no longer ignore.
This article is prescriptive. Rather than diagnosing higher education’s structural problems, we want to help families make better decisions before investing tens — or even hundreds — of thousands of dollars in pursuit of a college degree. College deserves the same level of scrutiny as buying a home or starting a business. Yet many families conduct almost no financial analysis before making this six-figure investment. They focus on dreams, traditions, prestige, and acceptance letters while overlooking financial risk.
Increasingly, that is a costly mistake that could haunt them for decades.
The premise that all students are “above average” and ready for college is fiction. According to the <a href="https://nces.ed.gov/surveys/bps/?utm" target="_blank" rel="noopener">National Center for Education Statistics</a>, 43% of students who enter postsecondary education complete no credential after six years. Most of those dropouts — roughly 60-70% — have student loan debt when they leave. Federal student loan balances now exceed<a href="https://thecollegeinvestor.com/student-loan-debt/" target="_blank" rel="noopener"> $1.8 trillion</a>, or about $40,000 per borrower, not including another $40,000 on average for parents using Parent PLUS loans.
The fastest-growing cohort of student loan debtors is <a href="https://www.newamerica.org/insights/seniors-with-student-loans-15-years-of-debt/?utm" target="_blank" rel="noopener">seniors aged 60+</a> — not because so many elderly are going back to school, but because they are turning 60 while still carrying old debt, or borrowing for their younger relatives. This group has grown sixfold since 2004, and their debt has grown 19-fold.
Employers think today’s college graduates are less prepared for jobs. A <a href="https://www.luminafoundation.org/resource/aligning-education-and-work/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">2026 Lumina-Gallup report</a> found that 58% of employers believe the class of 2026 is less prepared than graduates a decade ago. Another study found 75% of <a href="https://workplaceintelligence.com/college-graduate-skills-study/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">HR managers</a> believe most college educations are not preparing people for their jobs, and 91% say onboarding recent graduates costs more because they lack readiness. The same study found that 85% of graduates themselves say they wish their college had better prepared them for the workplace.
One likely contributor is that so many of them weren’t prepared to enter college at the outset. According to a new analysis of scores from <a href="https://www.edweek.org/teaching-learning/act-only-1-in-5-high-school-graduates-in-2023-fully-prepared-for-college/2023/10?utm_source=perplexity" target="_blank" rel="noopener">ACT college-admissions tests</a>, only one in five high schoolers in the class of 2023 graduated ready to succeed in their core introductory college classes.
Many graduates also struggle to find jobs aligned with their credentials. For years, <a href="https://www.newyorkfed.org/research/college-labor-market#--:explore:unemployment" target="_blank" rel="noopener">40–45%</a> of college graduates have worked in roles that do not require a degree. Nearly <a href="https://freopp.org/whitepapers/does-college-pay-off-a-comprehensive-return-on-investment-analysis/?utm" target="_blank" rel="noopener">half of master’s degree programs</a> leave students financially worse off.
A college degree still provides value for many students — but the value of a diploma now varies widely depending on the institution, its cost, the student’s likelihood of graduating, and the chosen field of study.
Meanwhile, many institutions have expanded recruitment far beyond the traditional college‑bound population. Financial pressures have pushed schools to pursue enrollment growth aggressively, including among students who may not be academically or financially prepared for the challenges ahead. As we previously outlined, many institutions now target these groups specifically — often including underrepresented students who face greater risks.
Of course, some students attend college for reasons unrelated to economics. Wealthy families, or students seeking the educational or social experience, may not prioritize cost‑value analysis. But for everyone else — the overwhelming majority of the market — a far more critical assessment is essential. That assessment begins with this fundamental question: Does college make economic sense for me? Answering that question should involve an unbiased financial analysis.
Assessing the Odds and Risk
With the cost of a degree at a top‑tier university often exceeding $300,000, a non‑wealthy family would be unwise not to evaluate the likely economic costs and rewards. Historically, many families avoided such analysis — confident that the economic payoff would exceed the cost, or citing a student’s “passion” as justification. Few parents would buy their teenager a $300,000 Ferrari simply because he was passionate about sports cars. Yet many spend comparable sums on degrees without demanding any evidence that the investment will pay off. The financial stakes — and potential damage — are similar even at less expensive schools if the family cannot truly afford the investment.
Return on Investment (ROI)
Colleges often highlight “the college premium,” noting that graduates tend to earn more than non‑graduates. <a href="https://www.aplu.org/our-work/4-policy-and-advocacy/publicuvalues/employment-earnings/?utm_" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Schools</a>, and even the <a href="https://www.bls.gov/opub/mlr/2020/beyond-bls/the-college-payoff-a-look-at-income-and-wealth-premiums.htm?utm_" target="_blank" rel="noopener">federal government</a>, frequently imply this is a causal relationship — a classic error of conflating correlation with causation. This is like claiming gym memberships cause longer lifespans. In reality, the correlation reflects underlying factors: higher incomes, healthier lifestyles, better diets, and lower smoking rates.
Additionally, college ROI projections often rely on one or more flawed assumptions:
Assumption #1: The student graduates. 
Only <a href="https://nscresearchcenter.org/yearly-progress-and-completion/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">61%</a> of first‑time, full‑time undergraduates finish within six years. <a href="https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ987305.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Underprepared students</a> have even lower graduation rates and are a growing portion of the overall student population. Some <a href="https://www.federalreserve.gov/publications/files/2024-report-economic-well-being-us-households-202505.pdf?utm" target="_blank" rel="noopener">60—70%</a> of those who leave college without a degree take student loan debt with them, and they are <a href="https://nces.ed.gov/use-work/resource-library/report/statistics-brief/federal-student-loan-debt-burden-noncompleters?utm" target="_blank" rel="noopener">five to six</a> times more likely to default on those loans than graduates.
Assumption #2: College takes four years. 
The average time to graduate is <a href="https://www.earnest.com/blog/average-time-to-earn-degree" target="_blank" rel="noopener">five to six</a> years, with only <a href="https://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=569" target="_blank" rel="noopener">44%</a> finishing in four. Additional years mean more tuition, room and board, fees, and living expenses. With college inflation at 3–4%, years five and six cost 16% and 20% more than year one. ROI calculations rarely include this.
Assumption #3: The major never changes. 
Up to <a href="https://www.clrn.org/what-percentage-of-students-change-their-major/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">70% of students change their major</a> at least once, often to less rigorous and less lucrative majors — <a href="https://nces.ed.gov/pubs2018/2018434/index.asp?utm" target="_blank" rel="noopener">especially true between STEM and non‑STEM fields</a>, and with <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0272775718304680?utm_source=chatgpt.com" target="_blank" rel="noopener">women disproportionately</a> making this switch. Only <a href="https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10863898/?utm" target="_blank" rel="noopener">10-15%</a> of students who begin as “pre‑med” matriculate into medical school. The earnings expectations vary greatly across these majors, making huge differences in long-term ROI projections.
Assumption #4: Opportunity costs don’t matter.
Two major opportunity costs are often overlooked:
<ul>
<li aria-level="1">Alternative uses of the money</li>
</ul>
Assume that a family is considering spending $35,000 per year to fund a student’s education. Alternatively, investing $35,000 per year in an S&amp;P 500 index fund for five years at a conservative 9% annual return would yield $228,000 after five years — and $1.97 million after 25 more years with no additional contributions. Might that be a better investment — especially for one of the four out of five students whom ACT identifies as unprepared for college?
<ul>
<li aria-level="1">Lost earnings during college</li>
</ul>
The median annual wage for non‑college graduates is $47,500. Four or five years of earnings — and savings — must be included in any realistic ROI analysis.
Assumption #5: Wage premiums stay high. 
The wage premium for college rose sharply from the <a href="https://www.frbsf.org/wp-content/uploads/wp2025-01.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">1980s through the early 2000s</a>, but since the mid-2010s, <a href="https://www.frbsf.org/research-and-insights/publications/economic-letter/2023/08/falling-college-wage-premiums-by-race-and-ethnicity/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">the premium has been largely flat or slightly down</a>. More recently, a number of bachelor’s programs have been projected to have <a href="https://www.universityherald.com/articles/80290/20260419/college-majors-worst-return-investment-2026-ranked.htm" target="_blank" rel="noopener">negative ROIs</a>.
Conclusion
Families should approach the college decision with the same discipline they would apply to any major investment: understand the risks, weigh the expected return, and make decisions based on evidence rather than emotion. Doing so will not eliminate risk, but it can greatly improve the odds that a college education, if chosen, becomes a sound investment rather than a costly mistake.
Our purpose is not to discourage students from attending college. Rather, it is to encourage informed decision-making based on evidence instead of flawed assumptions. College remains one of America’s greatest institutions when the right student chooses the right school and the right course of study at the right price. But it is not a one-size-fits-all path to prosperity, and the downside risks are far greater for some than others.
College is neither a guaranteed ticket to prosperity nor a decision that should be made on faith or passion. It is an investment. Like any investment, it should be evaluated on expected return, probability of success, and financial risk. Families who approach college with that discipline will make better decisions — and avoid turning one of life’s biggest possible opportunities into one of its biggest financial mistakes.
***
Greg Salsbury, Ph.D., serves on the Board of Advisors for <a href="https://starrs.us/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">STARRS.US</a> and is the former president of Western Colorado University. He earned his Ph.D. from the University of Southern California, an M.A. from the University of Illinois, and an M.A. from the Annenberg School for Communication and Journalism at USC.
John Kawauchi, MBA, is a former VP of Enrollment Management and Marketing at Western Colorado University and Lake Superior State University, after spending most of his career in Retirement Planning and Product Marketing in the Financial Services industry. He earned his MBA from the University of Chicago and a B.S. from Cornell University.

Students of human medicine in Leipzig

Why College Can Be The Biggest Financial Gamble You’ll Ever Make

College

Education

Universities

This piece is part of MI x DW, a collaboration that brings Daily Wire readers exclusive commentary and research from the Manhattan Institute’s world-class team of scholars.
***
“We are living through a period of extreme narcissism,” comedian and late-night talk show host Conan O’Brien <a href="https://www.bostonglobe.com/2026/05/28/metro/harvard-commencement-conan-obrien-speaker">told</a> Harvard University graduates assembled for his commencement address on May 28. O’Brien, a Harvard alumnus, used his platform to <a href="https://www.foxnews.com/media/comedian-conan-obrien-fires-back-trump-administration-harvard-commencement-speech">poke fun</a> at the Trump administration. But in recent years, laughter has been less common at college commencement addresses, which have become lightning rods for militant and performative activism by students who hijack what should be joyous celebrations. Thankfully, some university administrations are finally pushing back.
Ask New York University social psychologist Jonathan Haidt, whose institution chose him as this year’s commencement speaker. Ignoring Haidt’s bestselling books, prize-winning research, and decades of dedication to his calling, angry students — including the executive committee of NYU’s student government — <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2026/05/13/us/politics/nyu-graduation-speaker-free-speech-jonathan-haidt.html">denounced</a> his selection as “deeply unsettling.” As grounds for demanding his removal and replacement, detractors <a href="https://drive.google.com/file/d/13p3hbm84ZzsFznPDy2sdry3cCjkODL6P/view">cited</a> Haidt’s alleged “anti-LGBTQ” comments, long-standing advocacy against DEI, support for campus viewpoint diversity, and empirical critique of Gen Z digital device use.
They had a reasonable hope of success. The Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE) has documented <a href="https://www.fire.org/research-learn/campus-deplatforming-database?range=50&amp;orderdir=desc&amp;orderby=year&amp;keyword=Commencement">350 attempts</a> to cancel campus commencement speakers since 1998, many of them successful. So far this year, South Carolina State University, a historically black institution, has <a href="https://scdailygazette.com/2026/04/29/sc-state-university-disinvites-lt-gov-evette-from-commencement-after-outcry">canceled</a> a planned commencement address by Lt. Gov. Pamela Evette, a candidate for governor in 2026. Students expressed dismay over Evette’s vocal criticism of DEI policies and support for President Donald Trump, who has since <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2026/05/29/us/trump-pamela-evette-south-carolina-governor.html">endorsed</a> her gubernatorial bid. Two commencement speakers — David Kaganovsky at Drexel and Morton Schapiro at Georgetown’s law school — were forced to withdraw after their support for Israel became public knowledge on campus.
Rutgers University also <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/may/06/rutgers-cancel-graduation-speech-pro-palestine-post">canceled</a> its scheduled commencement speaker Rami Elghandour, an alumnus who is chairman and CEO of Arcellx, a biotech company, following complaints about his past online posts accusing Israel of “genocide” amid its war in Gaza. And at Utah Valley University, where Charlie Kirk was assassinated last September, author Sharon McMahon’s commencement invitation was <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2026/04/22/us/politics/sharon-mcmahon-utah-valley-university-charlie-kirk.html">canceled</a> following outrage about posts (later deleted) in which she was critical of Kirk in the days after his murder.
<h2><a href="https://manhattan.institute/subscribe?utm_source=DailyWire&amp;utm_medium=referral&amp;utm_campaign=reihan">Click here for more Manhattan Institute content.</a></h2>
In an encouraging sign, however, NYU held firm. Responding to the controversy, a university spokesman <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2026/05/13/us/politics/nyu-graduation-speaker-free-speech-jonathan-haidt.html">described</a> Haidt as “one of the most consequential thinkers of the 21st century.” President Linda Mills, a licensed clinical social worker who has launched a <a href="https://www.nyu.edu/about/leadership-university-administration/organization-directory/office-of-the-president/comms/welcome-to-the-spring-2026-semester.html">collaborative initiative</a> with Haidt to reduce student reliance on digital devices, <a href="https://www.linkedin.com/posts/jonathan-haidt-2a594666_nyu-wants-students-to-put-down-their-phones-activity-7432102541624135680-w7tu">said</a> that she is “inspired” and “moved” by his work. At NYU’s commencement on May 14, she proudly <a href="https://nyunews.com/news/2026/05/14/jonathan-haid-booed-commencement-speech">introduced</a> Haidt to the assembled crowd and presented him with an honorary doctorate. Some students booed and others walked out, but Haidt delivered his remarks in full — and neither the world nor NYU came to an end.
Fortunately, NYU was not alone this season. At the University of Arizona, former Google CEO and Chairman Eric Schmidt survived a <a href="https://tucson.com/news/local/education/college/article_ab7ed72c-4efb-4b2c-a46e-7afe81e15949.html">cancellation attempt</a> launched against his commencement speech by students aggrieved by his former girlfriend and business partner’s allegations of sexual harassment and assault. Arizona’s Women and Gender Student Council circulated a <a href="https://www.change.org/p/immediate-removal-of-eric-schmidt-as-the-ua-2026-commencement-speaker">petition</a> demanding his cancellation, a move supported by numerous other student groups.
But Arizona’s administration avidly backed Schmidt, with President Suresh Garimella <a href="https://tucson.com/news/local/education/college/article_078e3449-29cb-4e43-8193-42b666ce166c.html">praising</a> “his investments in scientific discovery and emerging technologies” and “research that shapes the future.” When Schmidt appeared before the graduating students, he was <a href="https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/ce8pqd54qneo">heavily booed</a> — but apparently for comments promoting AI, which many graduates regard as an obstacle to employment. An arbitration court has since <a href="https://pagesix.com/2026/06/01/celebrity-news/eric-schmidt-scores-victory-in-case-brought-by-ex-girlfriend">ruled</a> that Schmidt’s ex’s accusations against him were false, and awarded Schmidt $10 million in defamation charges.
Morehouse School of Medicine, another historically black institution not far from censorious South Carolina State, similarly stood by its chosen commencement speaker, Georgia Republican Congressman Richard McCormick. A white alumnus, McCormick faced vocal student <a href="https://www.change.org/p/it-s-bigger-than-politics-msm-students-strive-to-protect-the-integrity-of-commencement">opposition</a> due to “statements, views, and policies” that his critics alleged, “directly go against our institution’s mission and training.” McCormick’s detractors, who included over a thousand signatories to a <a href="https://drive.google.com/file/d/1dzTBmDjcLsraKJ2sawa05ZjAwZ2138lX/view">petition</a> opposing his selection, singled out as disqualifying factors his opposition to DEI, “gender affirming care,” and illegal immigration.
A Morehouse spokesman <a href="https://www.yahoo.com/news/articles/morehouse-school-medicine-defends-anti-213000744.html">said</a> that its administration had heard out student concerns but declared that the school “is a nonpartisan institution, and Dr. McCormick was invited because of his distinction as an alumnus.” Like Haidt, McCormick faced some <a href="https://www.ajc.com/education/2026/05/us-rep-mccormick-preaches-unity-to-morehouse-med-school-grads-after-backlash">booing</a>, but more and more colleges seem to be deciding that a speaker’s accomplishments are what should matter.
Showing some backbone is increasingly the wise choice for the controversy-averse administrators now facing scrutiny from government, media, civil society, donors, alumni concerned with free speech, tuition-paying parents, and students who just want an education. As higher education begins to encounter the long-predicted “enrollment cliff” of fewer students and lower revenues, the spotlight will only intensify. At least in the realm of commencement speakers, the pressure seems to be bearing fruit.
***
This is republished with permission from the Manhattan Institute’s City Journal. The original can be found <a href="https://www.city-journal.org/article/university-commencement-speakers-cancelled">here</a>.
Paul du Quenoy is president of the Palm Beach Freedom Institute.

‘We are living through a period of extreme narcissism,’ Conan O’Brien tells graduates at Harvard’s commencement

Crybaby College Commencement Protests Are Getting The Boot

Commencement

MI x DW

Meta launched a free program on Monday that it&#8217;s calling America’s Workforce Academy, a first-of-its-kind $115 million initiative designed to fast-track Americans into high-demand jobs without requiring a college degree.
Meta&#8217;s pitch is simple: train for free, get paid while you learn, and walk into a guaranteed job on the other side. Meta said that its new school is not a federal program or another handout but a private company spending its own money because it needs the workers for the next wave of a technological revolution. 
&#8220;The AI revolution is bringing change but also historic opportunities. Skilled workers electrified rural America one pole at a time,” said Meta’s President and Vice Chairman Dina Powell McCormick. “They manned the factories that built the arsenal that won World War II. Now a new generation will pour the foundations and lay the fiber that secures American strength in this new age.”
The program will launch as a pilot in four states: Louisiana, Ohio, Indiana, and Texas. America’s Workforce Academy seeks to output welders, electricians, plumbers, and fiber technicians, the workers who will physically build the data centers and infrastructure powering the artificial intelligence boom.
Mike Rowe, the host of the Discovery Channel&#8217;s &#8220;Dirty Jobs&#8221; and CEO of a foundation that awards $10 million a year in scholarships to aspiring tradesmen, praised Meta’s new program. 
“Workers are actually paid to learn,&#8221; Rowe said. &#8220;There is zero cost to them, no college debt and a fast certification, with a guaranteed job on the other end. This is an important step in the right direction, and one that I hope other companies will be inspired to take.&#8221; 
Meta said it is partnering with the National Urban League, Associated Builders and Contractors, and CBRE, along with a roster of regional groups including the U.S. Hispanic Chamber of Commerce, the Ohio Chamber of Commerce, and local economic development organizations across each of the pilot regions.
The idea for the academy came after Meta saw huge demand for a similar initiative. LevelUp, Meta’s fiber-installation training program, received 35,000 applications in the seven days after it launched.
As college tuition continues to soar, interest in trade schools has steadily increased. Earning a four-year degree in America costs an average <a href="https://www.sofi.com/learn/content/bachelor-degree-cost/">$153,080</a>, with in-state public schools averaging $108,584 and private nonprofit $234,512. 
Total student loan debt in the United States is now over <a href="https://educationdata.org/student-loan-debt-statistics">$1.8 trillion</a>, and many of the students carrying that debt also worry that the rise of artificial intelligence could eventually make their jobs obsolete. Gen Z&#8217;s outlook on AI is largely negative, with <a href="https://news.gallup.com/poll/708224/gen-adoption-steady-skepticism-climbs.aspx">42%</a> reporting they feel anxious about the technology&#8217;s rapid advancement. 
Meta, while not dismissing the possibility of workforce disruption, is betting that AI will also create a new generation of high-paying skilled trades jobs that cannot be outsourced to algorithms. The company argues that building the infrastructure behind the AI revolution will require millions of workers whose labor remains firmly rooted in the physical world and educated by its new America’s Workforce Academy.

US-INTERNET-TECHNOLOGY-FACEBOOK

Meta Launches A Free Alternative To College In Four Red States

Jobs

GettyImages-521922244

The College Degree Scam Nobody Wants To Admit

Upstream

A 21-year-old political commentator was attacked and temporarily blinded by a masked individual while debating transgender violence on a college campus earlier this week.
A video shows Ryley Niemi, a conservative who regularly debates leftist students, sitting at a table on the University of California Santa Cruz campus when a black-clad person wearing dark sunglasses and a mask approached him and dumped a bucket of black liquid on him.
Niemi chased after the individual who fled the scene, and people in the area began cheering and shouting for Niemi to “get the f*ck off this campus.” The attacker escaped, but in an exclusive interview with The Daily Wire, Niemi said the police are “actively investigating this and looking for the person.&#8221;
Niemi, said the liquid caused blindness in both eyes for three hours, and blindness for six hours in his right eye.
“EMTs flushed my eyes with five vials of saline solution,” Niemi said. During his visit to the ER, Niemi learned that his “right eye has a corneal abrasion, and 48 hours later, my right eye still hurts and is slightly blurry.”
He added that the attack resulted in semi-permanent damage to his right eye and cut short his debate at UC Santa Cruz.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-media-max-width="560">
At <a href="https://x.com/ucsc?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@ucsc</a>, a masked far-left extremist threw a bucket of black liquid on conservative activist <a href="https://x.com/RyleyNiemi_?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@RyleyNiemi_</a>. Leftists laughed and cheered on the attacker, who ran away.
Leftists routinely engage in and urge political violence and harassment against their ideological targets. <a href="https://t.co/a5qDhX6cdv">pic.twitter.com/a5qDhX6cdv</a>
— Andy Ngo (@MrAndyNgo) <a href="https://x.com/MrAndyNgo/status/2060209086721847511?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 29, 2026</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.x.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Niemi&#8217;s table featured signs that stated “trans women are men” and “transgenders are violent.” He said the attacker was “100% male” who appeared to be around 6&#8242; tall and “has a modified voice [because of hormone therapy], long hair, and feminine earrings.”
“The irony is,” Niemi continued, “that one of the signs said ‘trans-genders are violent.’ And then a transgender attacked me.”
This is not the first time Niemi has been <a href="https://x.com/jakerattlesnk/status/2045429911926735317">attacked</a>. Six weeks ago, Niemi interviewed a gay couple with a baby on the street and asked them about statistics on gay men committing child molestation. One of the men shoved him and proceeded to follow Niemi, punching him in the back of the head. Niemi said he suffered a concussion from the attack.
“The district attorney has let them off the hook,” Niemi added.
The Right-wing commentator explained that he holds debates to “change the mind of the American public to be more conservative.”
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-media-max-width="560">
Why are they so triggered when <a href="https://x.com/RyleyNiemi_?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@RyleyNiemi_</a> ask them completely reasonable questions about the child’s wellbeing?
I hope he pressed charges. <a href="https://t.co/ZiXnSrzH9l">pic.twitter.com/ZiXnSrzH9l</a>
— Jake Rattlesnake (@jakerattlesnk) <a href="https://x.com/jakerattlesnk/status/2045429911926735317?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">April 18, 2026</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.x.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

Trans flag

Right-Wing Commentator Attacked While Debating Trans Violence On College Campus

Leftists

Transgender

Violence

Free speech isn’t free at Texas universities. Apparently, it comes with strings attached, or at least that’s what I was told when I tried to host a pro-life event that got so derailed, I had to call on Students for Life of America’s (SFLA) attorneys for a demand letter to try and get it back on track.
It&#8217;s not just me. Students at the University of Texas, both at Dallas and Austin, <a href="https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https*3A*2F*2Fwww.fire.org*2Fcases*2Ffellowship-christian-university-students-university-texas-dallas-v-eltife&amp;data=05*7C02*7Ckhamrick*40studentsforlife.org*7Cae0cee521ae1404d4ffe08dea14d89f3*7Cb3f92ab929b141449c57d11e0e7a368a*7C0*7C0*7C639125551563320391*7CUnknown*7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ*3D*3D*7C0*7C*7C*7C&amp;sdata=dtwwVKn*2B7xobXYzqajEbrkoh5HCW2yQ9KzvUpM4bZnU*3D&amp;reserved=0__;JSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSU!!PxibshUo2Yr_Ta5B!0i32ArPoKX2-mdXVxc7iuAHJ4NhaXGwgerdqxyBS4y8AQGn5PgFiv_nhctfg-IW_6ARf_artpEf-AcuVwNDD$">are suing</a> the University of Texas system after being censored when schools used a Texas law as an excuse to limit free speech on college campuses. While the law is not currently enforceable, college campuses across Texas are still holding strong to their censorship regime — and it&#8217;s up to students to stand up for their rights.
My story began <a href="https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https*3A*2F*2Fstudentsforlife.org*2F2026*2F04*2F16*2Ffree-speech-in-name-only-how-ut-austin-is-preventing-my-student-group-from-speaking-up-for-life*2F&amp;data=05*7C02*7Ckhamrick*40studentsforlife.org*7Cae0cee521ae1404d4ffe08dea14d89f3*7Cb3f92ab929b141449c57d11e0e7a368a*7C0*7C0*7C639125551563353206*7CUnknown*7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ*3D*3D*7C0*7C*7C*7C&amp;sdata=e8RMiNBNMTNvEhywCUtnjeGTk91xp6Ut*2FmysB6LmWgw*3D&amp;reserved=0__;JSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSU!!PxibshUo2Yr_Ta5B!0i32ArPoKX2-mdXVxc7iuAHJ4NhaXGwgerdqxyBS4y8AQGn5PgFiv_nhctfg-IW_6ARf_artpEf-AT4BsCBy$">when I tried to host</a> a speaker on campus at the University of Texas as part of my SFLA activities. Rather than welcoming pro-life voices, the university demanded almost complete disassociation from SFLA for the event to go on, which made the event itself virtually impossible.
More specifically, the office told my group that our event could not include branded or promotional materials featuring both the outside organization and my student organization, Horns for Life; help managing the event; filming for social media; or co-sponsorship with SFLA or any off-campus organization.
That not only impacted my free speech rights, but my freedom of association, too.
In 2019, when Texas passed <a href="https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https*3A*2F*2Fcapitol.texas.gov*2FBillLookup*2FHistory.aspx*3FLegSess*3D86R*26Bill*3DSB18&amp;data=05*7C02*7Ckhamrick*40studentsforlife.org*7Cae0cee521ae1404d4ffe08dea14d89f3*7Cb3f92ab929b141449c57d11e0e7a368a*7C0*7C0*7C639125551563396873*7CUnknown*7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ*3D*3D*7C0*7C*7C*7C&amp;sdata=2AtQpIrbbtYNbU9928Xk5Ce1V*2F0kaoX7X6S88V6pMqE*3D&amp;reserved=0__;JSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUl!!PxibshUo2Yr_Ta5B!0i32ArPoKX2-mdXVxc7iuAHJ4NhaXGwgerdqxyBS4y8AQGn5PgFiv_nhctfg-IW_6ARf_artpEf-AT4TymyG$">Senate Bill 18</a>, it reinforced <a href="https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https*3A*2F*2Fwww.congress.gov*2Fcrs_external_products*2FLSB*2FHTML*2FLSB10438.web.html&amp;data=05*7C02*7Ckhamrick*40studentsforlife.org*7Cae0cee521ae1404d4ffe08dea14d89f3*7Cb3f92ab929b141449c57d11e0e7a368a*7C0*7C0*7C639125551563716854*7CUnknown*7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ*3D*3D*7C0*7C*7C*7C&amp;sdata=0Ikog9aHx*2F*2BTRI1Hd*2FIaOF5Tv00HLGpukZuopplhmec*3D&amp;reserved=0__;JSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUl!!PxibshUo2Yr_Ta5B!0i32ArPoKX2-mdXVxc7iuAHJ4NhaXGwgerdqxyBS4y8AQGn5PgFiv_nhctfg-IW_6ARf_artpEf-AXDU25Tu$">Supreme Court precedent</a> that outdoor campus spaces are public forums, thereby ensuring free speech protections at universities. In a total betrayal of these values, Texas passed <a href="https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https*3A*2F*2Fwww.capitol.texas.gov*2Ftlodocs*2F89R*2Fbilltext*2Fhtml*2FSB02972F.htm&amp;data=05*7C02*7Ckhamrick*40studentsforlife.org*7Cae0cee521ae1404d4ffe08dea14d89f3*7Cb3f92ab929b141449c57d11e0e7a368a*7C0*7C0*7C639125551563753706*7CUnknown*7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ*3D*3D*7C0*7C*7C*7C&amp;sdata=6JsTyqVn9QKarsTn9xQlqdGZFCPXSqtmSTYTXV8fzvA*3D&amp;reserved=0__;JSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJQ!!PxibshUo2Yr_Ta5B!0i32ArPoKX2-mdXVxc7iuAHJ4NhaXGwgerdqxyBS4y8AQGn5PgFiv_nhctfg-IW_6ARf_artpEf-AakeQ9It$">Senate Bill 2972</a>, or the Campus Protection Act, in September 2025 under the guise of protecting campuses from disruptions and preserving safety during &#8220;end-of-term&#8221; periods and even during specific times of the day.
The Campus Protection Act stopped students from engaging in acts of speech between 10 pm and 8 am, as well as from bringing guest speakers, amplifying sound, or using percussive instruments at demonstrations in the final two weeks of each semester. It is extremely broad, even disallowing student speech in private conversations, whether in dorm rooms or outdoor meeting spaces.
“The First Amendment doesn’t set when the sun goes down,” <a href="https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https*3A*2F*2Fwww.fire.org*2Fnews*2Flawsuit-texas-bans-first-amendment-public-universities-after-dark&amp;data=05*7C02*7Ckhamrick*40studentsforlife.org*7Cae0cee521ae1404d4ffe08dea14d89f3*7Cb3f92ab929b141449c57d11e0e7a368a*7C0*7C0*7C639125551563782445*7CUnknown*7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ*3D*3D*7C0*7C*7C*7C&amp;sdata=HEWBXSC*2Fhwx*2BevsjFIdxTtMbqSIAgPUB8HyXIE8*2Fo7g*3D&amp;reserved=0__;JSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJQ!!PxibshUo2Yr_Ta5B!0i32ArPoKX2-mdXVxc7iuAHJ4NhaXGwgerdqxyBS4y8AQGn5PgFiv_nhctfg-IW_6ARf_artpEf-ARkj-qwy$">said FIRE senior supervising attorney</a> JT Morris. “University students have expressive freedom whether it’s midnight or midday, and Texas can’t just legislate those constitutional protections out of existence.”
The bill was so unprecedented and broad that the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas issued an injunction <a href="https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https*3A*2F*2Fwww.fire.org*2Fnews*2Fvictory-federal-court-halts-texas-no-first-amendment-after-dark-campus-speech-ban&amp;data=05*7C02*7Ckhamrick*40studentsforlife.org*7Cae0cee521ae1404d4ffe08dea14d89f3*7Cb3f92ab929b141449c57d11e0e7a368a*7C0*7C0*7C639125551563806965*7CUnknown*7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ*3D*3D*7C0*7C*7C*7C&amp;sdata=7lyWqt1IQI12zcaFa09*2FX18T*2B8bYA8g1mtYVoxfCsUY*3D&amp;reserved=0__;JSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUl!!PxibshUo2Yr_Ta5B!0i32ArPoKX2-mdXVxc7iuAHJ4NhaXGwgerdqxyBS4y8AQGn5PgFiv_nhctfg-IW_6ARf_artpEf-AXgQLXpH$">stopping the law from being enforced</a> only a month later.
Despite the injunction, Texas universities continue to use these rules at the campus policy level. UT Austin cites SB 2972 as a justification for their policy that “states that a guest speaker may not staff a table or set up exhibits.”
Not only is pro-life speech being targeted, but religious speech and expression as well.
A group of students has sued the UT system and its various representatives on behalf of their Texas college groups, including <a href="https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https*3A*2F*2Fanyfocus.org*2Fut-dallasabout*2F&amp;data=05*7C02*7Ckhamrick*40studentsforlife.org*7Cae0cee521ae1404d4ffe08dea14d89f3*7Cb3f92ab929b141449c57d11e0e7a368a*7C0*7C0*7C639125551563827587*7CUnknown*7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ*3D*3D*7C0*7C*7C*7C&amp;sdata=10DzF9ua0ems*2Fv6r2pUNa7R2NCSTEvMT39b8EOvqKu8*3D&amp;reserved=0__;JSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSU!!PxibshUo2Yr_Ta5B!0i32ArPoKX2-mdXVxc7iuAHJ4NhaXGwgerdqxyBS4y8AQGn5PgFiv_nhctfg-IW_6ARf_artpEf-AaH94gSd$">The Fellowship of Christian University Students at UT-Dallas,</a> after they were <a href="https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https*3A*2F*2Fwww.fire.org*2Fnews*2Flawsuit-texas-bans-first-amendment-public-universities-after-dark&amp;data=05*7C02*7Ckhamrick*40studentsforlife.org*7Cae0cee521ae1404d4ffe08dea14d89f3*7Cb3f92ab929b141449c57d11e0e7a368a*7C0*7C0*7C639125551563845212*7CUnknown*7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ*3D*3D*7C0*7C*7C*7C&amp;sdata=81BT5sQASX2Am2oAbSw8QqBI3F9I8zpii4CCpOrfB8A*3D&amp;reserved=0__;JSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJQ!!PxibshUo2Yr_Ta5B!0i32ArPoKX2-mdXVxc7iuAHJ4NhaXGwgerdqxyBS4y8AQGn5PgFiv_nhctfg-IW_6ARf_artpEf-AZIZuNqu$">prevented from bringing a minister</a> to campus to pray for them during their class finals.
Texas Woman’s University <a href="https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https*3A*2F*2Ftwu.edu*2Fdean-of-students*2Fon-campus-free-speech*2F&amp;data=05*7C02*7Ckhamrick*40studentsforlife.org*7Cae0cee521ae1404d4ffe08dea14d89f3*7Cb3f92ab929b141449c57d11e0e7a368a*7C0*7C0*7C639125551563861696*7CUnknown*7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ*3D*3D*7C0*7C*7C*7C&amp;sdata=QxqF1fMSVVmEqVQ6S9YMFl30Hhf3aQFPtddVwfx6GEw*3D&amp;reserved=0__;JSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSU!!PxibshUo2Yr_Ta5B!0i32ArPoKX2-mdXVxc7iuAHJ4NhaXGwgerdqxyBS4y8AQGn5PgFiv_nhctfg-IW_6ARf_artpEf-AZofybQy$">enacted regulations on free speech,</a> calling it a “limited public forum.” The school placed limits on the times, places, and methods in which students can demonstrate on campus <a href="https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https*3A*2F*2Fpublic.powerdms.com*2FTWU1*2Fdocuments*2F1745744&amp;data=05*7C02*7Ckhamrick*40studentsforlife.org*7Cae0cee521ae1404d4ffe08dea14d89f3*7Cb3f92ab929b141449c57d11e0e7a368a*7C0*7C0*7C639125551563879914*7CUnknown*7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ*3D*3D*7C0*7C*7C*7C&amp;sdata=JrNy4CupwORxR0Rmvy2W7WemASJ882EPoCMuSXltjcM*3D&amp;reserved=0__;JSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSU!!PxibshUo2Yr_Ta5B!0i32ArPoKX2-mdXVxc7iuAHJ4NhaXGwgerdqxyBS4y8AQGn5PgFiv_nhctfg-IW_6ARf_artpEf-AZcH0uUL$">while telling them</a> “nothing in this policy may be construed to limit or infringe on a person’s right to freedom protected by the United States and Texas Constitutions,” as if the rules do not inherently do exactly this. Texas Tech University’s Lubbock campus also has <a href="https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https*3A*2F*2Fwww.yahoo.com*2Fnews*2Farticles*2Ftexas-tech-free-speech-policy-172434017.html&amp;data=05*7C02*7Ckhamrick*40studentsforlife.org*7Cae0cee521ae1404d4ffe08dea14d89f3*7Cb3f92ab929b141449c57d11e0e7a368a*7C0*7C0*7C639125551563896751*7CUnknown*7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ*3D*3D*7C0*7C*7C*7C&amp;sdata=c2DWOzTb5QmJ5ujYoCvwua7v2CKCf41fUBiC3W*2FmR*2FY*3D&amp;reserved=0__;JSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJQ!!PxibshUo2Yr_Ta5B!0i32ArPoKX2-mdXVxc7iuAHJ4NhaXGwgerdqxyBS4y8AQGn5PgFiv_nhctfg-IW_6ARf_artpEf-ASiBSwsP$">similar rules</a> now coming under fire.
While it is always advisable to follow campus rules, that does not mean Texas students cannot challenge them in the courts or otherwise.
Disallowing all guest speakers, claiming a limited public forum, imposing time limits, and limiting amplified sound all have precedent for being deemed impermissible in certain circumstances, especially if the university is using Senate Bill 2972 as an excuse to enforce these rules.
Using field representatives or coordinators from affiliate organizations to assist students in challenging university decisions against student organizations is a great first step. SFLA staff are equipped and eager to help our students. Additionally, reaching out to organizations like <a href="https://www.fire.org/">FIRE</a> allows student groups without resources from a larger organization to seek help navigating <a href="https://www.fire.org/defending-your-rights/legal-support">legal routes</a> addressing free speech challenges.
A university is a place to experience new ideas, diverse opinions, and freedom of discourse. The acts of tabling on campus and hosting speakers are not separate from this mission.
These unconstitutional rules do not disappear on their own. To see students’ free speech rights protected on university campuses again, students must speak up against the injustices happening on their campus and beyond — and the courts must follow their lead.
***
Tiffany Lomax is a senior student at the University of Texas at Austin. She serves as president of the Horns for Life chapter, where she is involved in pro-life advocacy and organizing events on campus.

Schwarzenegger Skips Debate To Rally Before Students

The Texas College Students Fighting Back Against Free Speech Censors

DW Opinion

Fire

Free Speech

Students for Life of America (SFLA)

Ben Shapiro laid into the “low IQ grievance ideology” of Candace Owens, Tucker Carlson, and Megyn Kelly on Tuesday night, urging a packed crowd of college students to reject the conspiracy theories, doomsday predictions, and anti-Trump rage being pushed by the podcasters.
During a speech at the University of Pennsylvania, the Daily Wire founder said that the three are pushing “a grievance-based view of the world in which they and those like them are perennial victims of the American system.” 
Shapiro’s speech came just a few days after President Donald Trump <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/trump-goes-nuclear-on-tucker-megyn-and-candace?author=Zach+Jewell&amp;category=News&amp;elementPosition=11&amp;row=0&amp;rowType=Vertical+List&amp;title=Trump+Goes+Nuclear+On+Tucker%2C+Megyn%2C+And+Candace">ripped</a> Carlson, Owens, and Kelly, saying they all have “Low IQs.” 
“They’re stupid people, they know it, their families know it, and everyone else knows it, too!” Trump wrote on Truth Social. 
Shapiro expanded on the president’s observation and argued that the group of anti-Trump podcasters has bought into “conspiratorial grievance politics,” which he compared to a “zombie infection.” 
“The attraction of low IQ ideology is envy,” Shapiro said. “A belief that lack of success is somehow a reflection not of bad decision-making or the hardship of life, but of a cruel system, designed by a nefarious cadre of evildoers. Envy. As Adam Smith put it, envy is ‘that passion which views with malignant dislike the superiority of those who are really entitled to all the superiority they possess.’” 
<iframe loading="lazy" title="YouTube video player" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/2Q54Jt70-Xo?si=PlQxntGbfSkVmRvp" width="560" height="315" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen"></iframe>
Some of these beliefs have recently been demonstrated by Carlson, Owens, and Kelly, Shapiro said, giving multiple examples of how they have pushed conspiratorial grievance politics. 
“You are indeed rolling in low IQ horesh*t if you believe, as Tucker Carlson does, that the president is a ‘slave’ to Israel, or that Alex Jones is a ‘prophet,’ or that the chief opposition to Venezuelan dictator Nicolás Maduro was ‘globohomo,’ or that Russia is wonderfully run, or that Sharia Law produces wonderfully clean and robust civilizations, or that Winston Churchill was the villain of World War II, or that Nick Fuentes is less evil than Ted Cruz.” 
Shapiro then called out the “low IQ slop” and “conspiratorial trash” pushed by Owens, who has suggested that Erika Kirk and Turning Point USA, along with the Israeli government, were involved in the assassination of Charlie Kirk. Shapiro also blasted Owens for saying that Charlie Kirk appeared to her in a dream and for latching onto the conspiracy theory that Brigitte Macron “has testicles.” 
“And worst of all, you are preying on low-IQ people when you cynically humor all of the foregoing for clicks and cash, as Megyn Kelly does,” Shapiro continued. “Nobody is upset with Megyn Kelly’s facile, trite, hackneyed takes on Middle Eastern politics. People are upset with her absolute cowardice and annoyed by the fact that, as a 55-year-old person, she cosplays courage like a clout-chasing 16-year-old girl.” 
Shapiro said the “low IQ grievance ideology” pushed by Carlson, Owens, and Kelly opposes the basic principles of what Shapiro called “high IQ conservatism.”
“High IQ conservatism rests on four foundations: free minds, free markets, public virtue, and a properly constructed government designed to protect these first three values,” he said. 
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
To Make America Great Again, we need high IQ Conservatives. <a href="https://twitter.com/benshapiro?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@benshapiro</a> <a href="https://t.co/YZ56hkT1ie">pic.twitter.com/YZ56hkT1ie</a>
— YAF (@yaf) <a href="https://twitter.com/yaf/status/2044558892617597251?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">April 15, 2026</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
“But low IQ grievance ideology rejects the fundamental basis of these central principles,” Shapiro added. 
He broke down how “low IQ grievance ideology” attempts to tear down free minds by arguing “that we are all victims of a sort of Marxist false consciousness, implanted in us by nefarious outside forces.” The ideology also attacks free markets “in true Marxist style.” 
“Low IQ grievance ideology also argues that public virtue is a sham. The church your parents sent you to as a child? It’s probably fundamentally broken. Either it’s cucked, or it’s intolerant,” Shapiro said.
The ideology says “the people we really need to emulate are true heroes like alleged rapist Andrew Tate and role models like Clavicular,” Shapiro added. “Or people spouting new forms of Christianity that are actually old forms of non-Christianity that revive the Marcion heresy and revel in attributing literally everything to demons, from aliens to underwater sea creatures to strange nighttime dog scratches.”
The line for Shapiro&#8217;s speech at UPenn, his first college speech this year, stretched around the block.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
Students are lining up around the block to see <a href="https://twitter.com/benshapiro?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@benshapiro</a> speak tonight at the University of Pennsylvania! <a href="https://t.co/qTakAnsrNt">pic.twitter.com/qTakAnsrNt</a>
— YAF (@yaf) <a href="https://twitter.com/yaf/status/2044185131716325859?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">April 14, 2026</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

ben low iq

Ben Shapiro Lays Into The ‘Low IQ’ Podcast Class

Ben Shapiro

Donald Trump

Megyn Kelly

Tucker Carlson

This article is part of MI x DW, a collaboration that brings Daily Wire readers exclusive commentary and research from the Manhattan Institute’s world-class team of scholars.
In this piece, originally published in <a href="https://www.city-journal.org/article/new-college-florida-gender-studies-activism">City Journal</a>, Colin Wright argues that faculty at New College of Florida continue to advance activist scholarship in ways that undermine the state’s post-woke reforms.
* * *
When Florida Governor Ron DeSantis pledged to rein in “<a href="https://www.npr.org/2022/07/13/1110842453/florida-gov-desantis-is-doing-battle-against-woke-public-schools">woke indoctrination</a>” in public education, he wasn’t bluffing. Over the last several years, he and the legislature have pursued an aggressive legal and governance strategy to push far-left ideology out of taxpayer-funded institutions. The justification is straightforward: the people have the right to demand that public universities not become subsidized activist factories.
Laws can close academic departments and impose subject-area bans on paper, but campuses are still run day-to-day by faculty and administrators who may not be interested in what voters want. When progressive activists dominate a university, they will inevitably try to circumvent the law.
Such efforts appear to be happening at New College today. Though the Gender Studies department was shut down at the Sarasota school, and Florida law forbids the use of state and federal funds to “promote or engage in political or social activism,” faculty continue to oversee work promoting activist pseudoscience, treat opposition to explicit content in K-12 libraries as equivalent to Nazism, and celebrate “queer bibliographies” and “resistance” to elected officials.
Consider a 2025 undergraduate thesis covering the “Evolution of Gender” in drama and fashion.
Nova Myhill, a professor of English and Theater, Dance &amp; Performance Studies at New College, sponsored the thesis, which explicitly lists “Gender Studies” as its “Area of Concentration.”
At a glance, the thesis appears to be a broad, benign survey of gender-expression conventions through fashion in the context of theater. But it quickly advances to extreme activist views of sex and biology. The opening section, titled “Our Idea of Sex,” portrays sex in humans not as “concrete” or “permanent” but as something “closer to being reflections of societal preconceptions than anything based only on ‘biology.’” It claims that the idea that humans have two sexes became widespread only “around the mid-1700s” due to “changing values of what was important within identity, class and gender beginning to take the utmost importance when using clothing as a symbol or sign of identity.” It even asserts that “there was a time when we conceived of the human race as only ‘one-sex’,” and that our “re-envisioning of the sexes” during the Enlightenment into two categories — male and female — actually “led to the differentiation and specific designation of reproductive organs; the penis, testicles, ovaries, and uterus.”
If this were the only undergraduate thesis at New College promoting such radical activist views, it might be dismissed. It is not.
In January 2026, the college approved and archived an undergraduate thesis in the Division of Humanities that engaged in political activism and covered Gender Queer and Fun Home — books the sexually explicit content of which has prompted parents to oppose their inclusion in school libraries. Myhill also sponsored this thesis and is thanked effusively in the acknowledgements.
Oddly, this thesis includes two abstracts. The first, more formal one describes an exploration of “book censorship, theft, and destruction,” framed as actions “employed to specifically target queer, trans, Jewish, and other marginalized communities,” and ends by describing the authors’ “queer works” as “an act of cultural legacy, heritage transmission, and resistance.” The second reads like a direct taunt of DeSantis and New College’s policy reforms:
<blockquote>This thesis is about queers, trans people, gender, Nazis, book burning, moral panics, censorship, Magnus Hirshfeld, pornography . . . queer bibliography, the Phantasma, classroom libraries, Ron DeSantis, what it’s like to be erased, and also how people fight back . . . so why not read it already?</blockquote>
This isn’t “academic” in any meaningful sense, but rather activist writing designed to indoctrinate, recruit, and promote activism.
In one section, the thesis classifies Gender Queer as essential reading and mocks DeSantis for displaying redacted pages from the book during his November 2023 debate with California Governor Gavin Newsom. It frames Florida’s higher education reforms as part of an “anti-gender movement” with “chilling reach.”
The thesis also compares Manhattan Institute Senior Fellow Christopher F. Rufo’s rhetoric to the “paranoia and persecution of McCarthyism in the 1950s” and claims that he helped incite a “reactive moral panic” like the one behind Nazi-era book purges in 1930s Germany. It compares <a href="https://x.com/christopherrufo/status/1824307070839165333">Rufo’s tweet</a> about abolishing the college’s Gender Studies program to a “long and fiery radio address” delivered by “Joseph Goebbels.” Again, such comparisons are not objective scholarship but political activism.
Other recent theses at New College also veer in an activist direction, including a 2025 thesis on “Queer Resistance and the Fight for Change in Morocco,” a 2026 thesis on “Why Queer People Like Horror Films,” and another in 2025 titled “Who Holds the Mic?: Exploring Image, Control, and Identity in Queer.”
Of course, Florida’s higher-ed reforms don’t ban students from discussing controversial topics in class or engaging in activism in their free time. State leaders intended them to prevent public institutions from using public funds to “promote, support, or maintain” programs or activities that “advocate for diversity, equity, and inclusion” or “promote or engage in political or social activism.”
The work required to shepherd student theses entails faculty time and labor, institutional oversight, and curriculum funded by and developed under the authority of the university. It strains credulity to present as legitimate scholarship works that push false, ideologically charged views of biology or that describe themselves as works of “resistance.” A process that produces such works appears to flout Florida law’s intent to prevent state and federal funds from being used to “promote or engage in political or social activism.”
None of this is to say that shutting down New College’s gender-studies department was in vain. The volume of activist “scholarship” produced at the institution has declined markedly, and that’s a true achievement.
Nonetheless, Florida’s academic reforms are not self-enforcing. As always, personnel is policy. True believers on the faculty will look for workarounds. If nobody is paying attention, abolished departments will soon reappear inside more traditional ones — in this case, the departments of English and Theater, Dance &amp; Performance Studies.
Institutional responsibility lies with the faculty and administrators who decide which scholarship to approve, endorse, or reward. New College’s trustees and the state legislature can pass resolutions and rewrite statutes, but they cannot monitor every thesis committee or syllabus. 
That requires constant vigilance, because the pattern is predictable: abolish the department, then watch its ideology migrate to the English department, the history department, or the library.
If New College wants to fulfill its evolution into a post-woke institution, its guardians should not approve scholarship that treats its vital reforms as analogous to a second Holocaust. Leaders should hold faculty accountable when they use university resources to resurrect discarded programs and pursue activism under new names.
* * *
<a href="https://www.city-journal.org/person/colin-wright">Colin Wright</a> is an evolutionary biologist and Manhattan Institute Fellow.

Florida Governor Ron DeSantis engages with New College of Florida

At New College of Florida, Gender Studies Quietly Continues

Florida

Gender

gender ideology

Leftism

Manhattan Institute

Ron DeSantis

School Board

Woke Culture

Last week, my home state of Michigan witnessed something truly terrifying: a <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/police-respond-to-reports-of-active-shooter-as-michigan-synagogue-goes-up-in-smoke">terrorist attack</a> at a house of worship. The attacker drove a vehicle filled with explosives into a synagogue in West Bloomfield, a suburb of Detroit, just a few hours outside of my district.
Thankfully, on-site security personnel quickly intervened — stopping the terrorist and preventing any injury to the innocent children or staff inside. I am grateful to these guardians for responding quickly to safeguard those innocent lives, and I pray for the recovery of those injured in stopping this despicable attack.
This attack, however, isn’t an isolated incident. It is part of a broader and deeply troubling rise in antisemitism that has spread across our country since the October 7, 2023 massacre in Israel.
Nowhere is that rise more evident than on our college campuses.
Students have been whipped into an activist frenzy targeting Israel and the Jewish people.
Rather than stamping out the antisemitic fervor, faculty are fanning the flames. Many campus leaders seem completely unwilling to do anything about it.
<div id="attachment_1062451" style="width: 874px" class="wp-caption aligncenter"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" aria-describedby="caption-attachment-1062451" class="size-large wp-image-1062451" src="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/03/GettyImages-2154554442-864x576.jpg" alt="TOPSHOT - Pro-Palestinian protesters, some wearing cap and gown, hold signs and chant at a rally in front of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) in Cambridge, Massachusetts, on May 28, 2024. (Photo by Joseph Prezioso / AFP) (Photo by JOSEPH PREZIOSO/AFP via Getty Images)" width="864" height="576" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/03/GettyImages-2154554442-864x576.jpg 864w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/03/GettyImages-2154554442-300x200.jpg 300w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/03/GettyImages-2154554442-768x512.jpg 768w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/03/GettyImages-2154554442.jpg 1024w" sizes=" (max-width: 864px) 100vw, 864px" />JOSEPH PREZIOSO/AFP via Getty Images</div>
On campuses across the nation — regardless of size or location — student groups are organizing to harass and intimidate Jewish students. Groups like Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP) are the ringleaders, often with the backing of similar faculty organizations.
At Columbia University, antisemitic demonstrators stormed a library, disrupted students, and chanted slogans like “from the river to the sea.” Eden Yadegar, my guest to President Trump’s Joint Address to Congress last year, described it as “disrupting one of the most basic functions of the university.”
All too often, this chaos leads to violence. The House Committee on Education and Workforce — of which I am the <a href="https://edworkforce.house.gov/">chairman</a> — heard from Michael Kaminsky, a student at DePaul University and a first-generation American who was assaulted by masked attackers for his efforts to promote dialogue about Israel and the Jewish faith. He was left with a fractured wrist, and his friend was knocked unconscious.
This is not what college should be. Students should be focused on learning and growing — not fearing harassment or assault because of their identities.
These actions are not happening in a vacuum. They are being encouraged — sometimes openly — by faculty.
At Haverford College, Tarik Aougab — a member of Haverford Faculty for Justice in Palestine (FSJP) — labeled pro-Israel students as “racist genocidaires” while praising the October 7 attacks as “a historic moment.”
At the University of California, Berkeley, a professor posted that he “could have been one of those who broke the siege.”
At MIT, former linguistics professor Michel DeGraff accused a student of having a Zionist “mind infection.”
<div id="attachment_1062465" style="width: 874px" class="wp-caption aligncenter"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" aria-describedby="caption-attachment-1062465" class="size-large wp-image-1062465" src="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/03/GettyImages-2205276310-864x576.jpg" alt="Michel DeGraff a former professor of linguistics and now faculty at large of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) attends a protest at city hall in Cambridge, Massachusetts on December 9, 2024. The protest calls for the city to intervene and take action against MIT for its role in the Israeli and Palestinian conflict and for MIT to loose its non profit status. (Photo by Joseph Prezioso / AFP) (Photo by JOSEPH PREZIOSO/AFP via Getty Images)" width="864" height="576" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/03/GettyImages-2205276310-864x576.jpg 864w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/03/GettyImages-2205276310-300x200.jpg 300w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/03/GettyImages-2205276310-768x512.jpg 768w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/03/GettyImages-2205276310.jpg 1024w" sizes=" (max-width: 864px) 100vw, 864px" />JOSEPH PREZIOSO/AFP via Getty Images</div>
This kind of rhetoric has consequences.
Let’s be clear: for many Jewish Americans, Israel is central to their identity. When students are targeted under the guise of “anti-Zionism,” the line between activism and antisemitism is not just crossed — it’s erased.
And yet, too many university leaders have failed to meet this moment.
Time and again, university presidents have come before this Committee and refused to take responsibility. They hedge, they equivocate, and they fail to enforce even their own rules.
The result is what we see today: antisemitism that is spreading, intensifying, and, in some cases, turning violent.
My Committee has released a report documenting just how serious this problem has become.
The findings are clear: weak leadership, radical faculty, and emboldened student groups have created an environment where antisemitism festers — and Jewish students are paying the price.
This cannot continue.
* * *
Tim Walberg represents Michigan’s 5th Congressional District and is serving his ninth term in the U.S. House of Representatives. He currently chairs the House Committee on Education and the Workforce.
The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.

Protesters Gather Outside Pro-Palestinian Activist Mahmoud Khalil’s Court Conference In New York

The Profs Aren’t Alright: How Radical Faculty Fuel The Rise Of Campus Antisemitism

The Profs Aren't Alright: How Radical Faculty Fuel The Rise Of Campus Antisemitism

American Universities

antisemitism

Columbia University

Hamas

Israel

Jews

October 7

Protestors

Radical Islam

U.S. House of Representatives

The gunman who opened fire at Old Dominion University in Norfolk, Virginia, on Thursday has been identified as Mohamed Bailor Jalloh, a former National Guard soldier who was previously convicted of supporting ISIS, according to multiple reports.
Jalloh, 36, discussed plans to carry out a Fort Hood-style attack with a government informant he believed was an ISIS terrorist, <a href="https://www.nbcwashington.com/news/local/ex-national-guard-member-from-virginia-sentenced-to-11-years-for-terrorism-after-supporting-isis/35484/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">according</a> to NBC4 Washington. Jalloh was sentenced to 11 years behind bars and an additional five years of supervised release.
He was let out early in December 2024, <a href="https://nypost.com/2026/03/12/us-news/old-dominion-university-gunman-idd-as-former-national-guardsman-convicted-of-plotting-attack-to-support-islamic-state/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">according</a> to the New York Post.
Jalloh traveled to Africa with his father in 2015, where he met with an ISIS recruiter, according to NBC4. That same year, he went to Sierra Leone to stay with the group&#8217;s facilitator and planned to go to Libya to join the terrorist organization, but that never happened.
At one point, he ventured to Niger to join ISIS and even boarded a truck full of other terror recruits, but bailed out after 18 hours, according to NBC4.
Jalloh praised the gunman who killed five soldiers in Chattanooga, Tennessee, in July 2015, to the informant, <a href="https://www.justice.gov/archives/opa/pr/former-army-national-guard-member-arrested-attempting-provide-material-support-isil" target="_blank" rel="noopener">according</a> to the Department of Justice. He also sent $500 to a man he believed was an ISIS member, who was actually an undercover FBI agent.
He pleaded guilty in October 2015 to attempting to provide material support to ISIS.
Jalloh, who is a naturalized American citizen from Sierra Leone, stormed into a classroom on Thursday and asked if it was an ROTC course, according to the New York Post. When someone confirmed that it was, he opened fire, shooting the professor several times.
The professor, a retired military officer, died at the hospital, according to the news outlet. One of the students heroically stabbed Jalloh to death to stop him from harming others.
FBI Director Kash Patel confirmed on X that one person is dead and two others were wounded in the shooting.
The shooter, he <a href="https://x.com/FBIDirectorKash/status/2032183663350214858">said</a>, &#8220;is now deceased thanks to a group of brave students who stepped in and subdued him – actions that undoubtedly saved lives along with the quick response of law enforcement.&#8221;
&#8220;The FBI is now investigating the shooting as an act of terrorism. Our Joint Terrorism Task Force is fully engaged, embedded with local authorities, and providing all resources necessary in the investigation,&#8221; Patel said.
Secretary of the Army Dan Driscoll <a href="https://x.com/SecArmy/status/2032170679404024043" target="_blank" rel="noopener">said</a> the injured victims were &#8220;Army personnel.&#8221;
The shooting occurred hours before an attacker rammed a vehicle into a Michigan synagogue and opened fire on the building.

Screenshot 2026-03-12 at 3.57.15 PM

Old Dominion University Gunman Identified As Ex-National Guardsman Turned ISIS Operative

ISIS

School Shooting

Shooting

Terrorism

terrorist attack

U.S.

Virginia

This article is part of <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/introducing-upstream-a-lifestyle-and-culture-section-of-the-daily-wire" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Upstream,</a> The Daily Wire’s new home for culture and lifestyle. Real human insight and human stories — from our featured writers to you.
***
I told myself it was motion sickness. The tour bus had lost air conditioning, my entire college chorale sweating our way back to campus from a tour of New England. I tried to distract myself in conversation, but nausea won out and I ran for the tiny bathroom at the back of the bus. “Did you get your reading report turned in, yet?” A friend asked as I whizzed by. I shook my head.
When we got home, my husband and I stopped to grab groceries and a pregnancy test. I didn’t keep them stocked because I had no intention of needing one for over a year — when I would graduate with a journalism degree. We wanted to start our family young, just not before graduation.
I had ignored early symptoms until fatigue consumed me a few days into the tour. I pushed on in denial, trying not to throw up lobster rolls and clam chowder. The positive pregnancy test didn’t surprise me much, but it did send shockwaves through our little world. We were grateful and humbled (so much for natural family planning).
My journalism professor’s reaction captured my own tension between delight and overwhelm.
“Oh are you?” He asked with a congratulatory smile. “But how are you going to do all of the things I need you to do?” I laughed and assured him that, God permitting, I would do it all.
Conversations about <a href="https://www.compactmag.com/article/get-married-young/">the benefits of getting married young</a> are cropping up all over the internet recently. Pronatalist activists are encouraging people to have more kids, and sooner. Simone and Malcolm Collins are a pronatalist couple warning about the birthrate crisis and aiming for 14 children through IVF. They recently <a href="https://x.com/SimoneHCollins/status/2017242647195205732">argued</a> for having kids in college, especially if universities better support parents. They even imply that college could be an ideal context in which to have kids: “Late night wake-ups with a baby are no problem for college students who are used to pulling all-nighters,” they say.
I believe children are a gift from God, and I was given remarkably favorable circumstances for finishing school with a baby. But I learned that college and kids are a difficult, not an ideal, combination. You just can’t do it all. 
At least attempting to graduate was a no-brainer for me.
I once wandered a park with my boyfriend and our conversation drifted to whether we could get married while still in school; he could graduate a year before me and work while I finished up. But I worried that dragging debt into a young marriage was unwise and impractical. Would it be too much of a burden? He listened thoughtfully before responding. 
“If you really want this, I’ll work hard and we’ll get through it,” he said. “I’ll do whatever it takes to help you finish.”
We got married two years later over Christmas break, and jumped back into classes together. Fast forward to April, and we discovered our baby was due at the beginning of Christmas break (a truly providential due date). I hoped that professors at my Christian conservative school would be supportive. I still wanted my degree and one more year in a community I loved. But that year would look starkly different from my dreams. My paradigm would shift from “soak in senior year” to “survive.”
I carried a bag of almonds with me through the end of the spring semester like a talisman to ward off nausea. I nibbled them behind the piano at strategic moments during chorale concerts. Getting out of bed in the morning felt impossible, and I drove home to sleep through classes I couldn’t sit through. I only made it through finals thanks to weeks of extensions from professors.
My husband helped me prepare for my new normal. Stress about academics was not an option. Health was the priority for me and the baby. Previously nicknamed “Hermione” for my type-A approach, I would need to settle for passing grades.
Extracurriculars had been the frosting to my college cake. I loved chorale, moot court, and drama, and I’d even started an a cappella group. Now I had to cut back or let go. Before I told my close friends my news, I told my moot court coach. My goal had been to secure a competitive partner and shoot for the national championship. But now that I likely couldn’t compete in January, I didn’t want to disappoint an ambitious partner.
I front-loaded an immense credit load for senior fall to make the spring semester with a newborn a little easier. I registered for 17 credits plus another 8 credits of intermediate French online. I waddled around in maternity blouses and slacks, battling brain fog. All that French I paid thousands for? It’s pretty much gone. I qualified for nationals in moot court, but made the painful decision to opt out.
I finished finals before my due date and emailed professors to make sure I could bring my baby into class. Then I slept, curb-walked, and pulled my first all-nighter birthing my daughter into the world. 
I had no idea how the spring would unfold. My mother-in-law flew out for three weeks to help me resume classes. She stocked our freezer with food. I stocked the stroller with burp cloths, pacifiers, and nursing covers, taking notes when I wasn’t breastfeeding or walking hallways.
Nighttime feedings weakened my academic abilities. <a href="https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10204456/#sec4-clockssleep-05-00022">Research suggests</a> that sleep deprivation impairs your brain’s ability to retain new information. I’d stare at a single physics problem for an hour, my mind just as blurry as my tear-filled eyes. Before the baby, I had been reveling in a rich education. Now I was just hoping to secure a degree. 
I also felt cut adrift from class camaraderie. I was known to one student simply as “that girl with the stroller.” I skipped social events and felt my wit and energy wither. My classmates were soaking in their college experience. I was savoring quieter moments with my family of three.
Community looked different, but it was still sweet. Some friends took slots to play with my daughter each week while I tackled assignments. They helped me with diaper blow-outs during physics lab. They endlessly encouraged me. Guys in my classes helped me wrangle the stroller in and out of classrooms. My daughter became a mascot in classes, cooing happily on her blanket while I took notes. I dreaded being a distraction, but she brought smiles and baby fever everywhere she went.
Just a few weeks before graduation, we got strep throat. I spent days in bed tending a feverish baby and feeling the weight of late assignments with every excruciating swallow. My mom flew across the country to help me catch up. Through it all, my husband worked full-time, washed countless dishes, rocked the baby, and folded laundry.
By God’s grace, I walked across the graduation stage with my 5-month-old in attendance. I’ve already forgotten my final grades. I don’t even remember the GPA threshold for the honors tassels I earned. I do remember the pink tassel I found hanging in my apartment before commencement. My husband bought it to represent an honor that wouldn’t be recognized on my diploma: bringing life into the world and nurturing it. I couldn’t do it all, but the sacrifices were worth it.
***
Clara York is a freelance reporter and poet writing on family and religious issues. She lives in Virginia with her husband and two young daughters.
The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.

Woman pushing baby in a pram

‘That Girl With The Stroller’ — I Loved My Baby, But College Was Never The Same

Menu