今年秋天，在美国大学里，持不同意见的人越来越多，而且不仅仅是学生活动人士。由于新的限制措施限制了学生的抗议活动，教师们也开始着手这项事业。
对教师来说，新的抗议规定威胁到言论自由和思考自由，而这两者都是大学生活的核心。本学期，一些最引人注目的示威活动涉及教授们为抗议本身的权利发声。
去年春天，亲巴勒斯坦的帐篷营地挤满了学校，扰乱了毕业典礼计划，引发了反犹太主义的指责，并引发了新的限制。
印第安纳大学（Indiana University） 8月份出台了一项“表达性活动政策”，禁止在晚上11点之后举行抗议活动，禁止在校园里露营，并要求事先批准标牌。每周日，一群教职员工、学生和社区成员聚集在校园里举行烛光守夜活动，一直持续到晚上11点之后。
参加了守夜活动的名誉教授罗斯·斯基巴（Russ Skiba）说，新的限制是限制校园学术自由的更大运动的一部分。
在印第安纳州，共和党州长于3月签署了一项法律，加强州政府对公立大学的监督。这项法律是由一名议员提出的，他说大学存在“单一思维”，要求教师在获得终身教职后接受审查，看他们是否在促进思想的多样性，并将他们的政治观点排除在课堂之外。斯基巴和其他印第安纳州的教授普遍反对该法案，他们批评该法案含糊不清，需要解释。
斯基巴说：“大学是言论自由的堡垒，但是当你有一场反民主的运动时，最受攻击的地方之一就是言论自由。”
全国其他地方大学的教职员工以抗议、守夜和要求解释的方式反对新规定。
16日，美国哈佛大学的教授们在校内图书馆举行了“自习”活动，以支持因举行类似示威而被暂时禁止进入图书馆的亲巴勒斯坦学生。今年9月，一个代表加州大学教职员工的团体提出申诉，称该系统试图遏制他们的学术自由，并“以一种与大学自身立场不符的方式”阻止他们讲授以色列-哈马斯战争。
对一些教授来说，限制抗议也是一个劳工问题。
大学授予终身教职的教授越来越少，在某些领域面临着完全取消终身教职的压力。几个州的立法机构对如何教授种族、性别和历史等话题很感兴趣。一些教授说，管理人员下达的抗议指导方针是教师在大学事务中的发言权被削弱的另一种方式。
罗格斯大学（Rutgers University）新闻与媒体研究教授、美国大学教授协会（American Association of University Professors）主席托德·沃尔夫森（Todd Wolfson）说，“作为教师，我们必须组织起来，要求共享治理，让我们有权审查和挑战这些政策。”“它们不是由我们机构的学术部门出身的人制作的。”
自一年多前战争开始以来，全国校园的紧张局势一直很高。当时哈马斯领导的武装分子冲进以色列南部，造成大约1200人死亡，其中大部分是平民，并绑架了大约250人。加沙卫生部（Gaza Health Ministry）称，以色列的进攻已造成4.2万多名巴勒斯坦人死亡，但没有说明其中有多少人是武装分子。
Colleges have been under tremendous pressure, including from Republicans in Congress, to protect students from discrimination while upholding free speech. Demonstrations last spring blocked foot traffic in parts of some campuses and included instances of antisemitic imagery and rhetoric. Some Jewish faculty members and students have the protests made them feel unsafe.
Shirin Vossoughi, a Northwestern University professor, was among 52 faculty members who signed an open letter opposing the school's new demonstration policy as caving to political pressure to silence certain types of activism. She said the rules crack down not just on free speech, but pro-Palestinian voices in particular.
“A lot of universities have rewritten their demonstration and code of conduct policies this summer, and I think my first thought is that it is very clear that it’s in response to dissent around Palestine," she said.
During the protests last spring, some faculty members joined ranks with demonstrators. Others acted as mediators for students they see as under their care and protection. Faculty voted no confidence against leaders of schools including Columbia University, the University of Massachusetts, Brandeis University, and Cal Poly Humboldt over their handling of the protests.
At Northwestern University, Steven Thrasher was among three faculty members charged by university police for obstructing law enforcement during last spring's protests. He was suspended and removed from teaching this fall while under investigation by the university.
“The way that I saw my role was as a protector of the students' safety and of their ability to express themselves,” Thrasher said this fall. “I knew as soon as I started seeing violence happening towards students that I would do what I could.”
While schools say the rules are meant to limit disruptions, faculty members say they have the effect of neutralizing dissent.
“The whole point of a protest is to be seen and heard,” said Michael Thaddeus, a mathematics professor at Columbia University, where new rules require advance notice and prevent demonstrations that “substantially inhibit the primary purposes” of an area of campus. “Free speech rights aren’t served if you can only speak into the void and not have anybody hear you, and that includes the right to be seen and heard by people who don’t like what you have to say.”
Professors also drew a connection to the growing percentage of lecturers, adjuncts and professors who do not have tenure protections. Professors increasingly see the issue of speech and academic freedom as a labor issue as a result of the crackdowns, said Risa Lieberwitz, AAUP's general counsel.
“We’re seeing unionization growing and increasing,” she said. “I think to some extent it’s because it’s so important to organize, to claim democratic rights.”
Wolfson said professors must stand up for students’ rights to demonstrate and speak freely.
“Their freedom of speech rights are the lifeblood of the university,” Wolfson said. “We cannot have a university based on critical thinking and exploring questions if we’re going to clamp down on students’ rights to protest something they think is a massive problem, and if they see a way for the university to actually engage in it productively.”
Associated Press writer Collin Binkley contributed to this report.
