As I understand the law, restrictions on free speech cannot extend beyond what is necessary to protect other vital interests. Frankly, I don’t know exactly where the courts have drawn the line between statements that are protected free speech and statements that can be prohibited because they create an illegally hostile workplace or otherwise constitute illegal harassment. But I do know that there is no general interest in “equality” that would permit the government to outlaw speech that may be disparaging or advocate inequality as to particular groups (See Matal v. Tam and National Socialist Party of America v. Village of Skokie).
Also as I understand the law, public universities are government actors. Government actors cannot discriminate among speakers based on the content of the speakers’ messages. It’s that simple.
So no matter how lofty their credentials and how sophisticated their arguments, ignore the commentators who are trying to rewrite First Amendment law to make free speech subordinate to “equality,” or subject to government deciding that the message is deserving of an audience.
The contents of this blog, this web site, and any writings by me that are linked here, are all my personal commentary. None of it is intended to be legal advice for your situation.