Calls for academics to conduct more public scholarship have been ongoing for years, and have only gained momentum as universities seek to demonstrate the utility of academic research to society writ large. But the rise of authoritarian tendencies at the state and federal levels is exposing scholars to serious consequences for sharing or even conducting their work, from a professor arrested for engaging in scholarly activities to a graduate student sent to an immigration detention center for writing an op-ed.
Despite historically fierce protections of free speech afforded, the rise of such government policies and practices is silencing academics across fields, from the humanities to the social sciences to the hard sciences. This silencing tends to mainly impact academics who hold marginalized racial, ethnic, or gender identities, or who are part of marginalized groups because of their sexual orientation or immigration status.
Silences can be hard to identify, but according to colleagues, they’re already happening. This month, fellow professors at the American Educational Research Association (AERA) annual conference shared that some of their doctoral students were unable to attend the flagship annual conference because of their concerns that their focus on equity-based research, coupled with their precarious immigration status, would flag them as “threats” and they would end up in an immigration detention center. This is not far-fetched either. Something similar happened to a scholar on his way to a conference.
Yet, engagement in such academic, professional communities matters for whether students land an academic job after they graduate. In turn, those scholars who are hired train the next generation of researchers.
But fears around speaking up are also harming professors who already have a toehold within institutions. That’s because developing a reputation as a subject expert is essential to professional advancement. Said plainly: academics who participate in public and academic debates achieve professional markers and promotions with more ease. To advance in academia (e.g., get tenure), you must be known. But you can’t be known, if you can’t speak up. All of which impact who gets to be part of, and to lead, the academic community.
These silences also hurt the wider community. Academics play an important role in shaping public and academic debates through their scholarship and through their public work. This matters because it positions research as a public good to improve the world around us. My own research has shown the societal value that research can have and calls for greater researcher engagement with courts, public policy, and practice.
What's worse in the current context is that the list of ideas that might run against the government continues to grow. As a repressive regime expands its reach and consolidates power, it identifies new enemies. This makes for shifting goal posts that place marginalized academics in danger when speaking up. Scholars may be punished for publishing on issues they do not realize will be considered dangerous in the future.
In contrast, academics who hold privileged identities — such as secure immigration status, race, gender, or sexual orientation — have greater latitude to speak up. Their identities are often not the target of these policies. This reinforces a problematic cycle: those from privileged backgrounds continue to be overrepresented in the academy, while those most marginalized continue to be pushed out and underrepresented.
Institutions of higher education can respond by revising promotion evaluation metrics that account for the imposed silencing. This might include giving people extra years in their tenure clock to account for diminished productivity. Many institutions did this at the height of the COVID pandemic.
They might also give people an opportunity to pivot to topics that are less dangerous at the current moment. Scholars are often expected to create a research agenda that is coherent and are evaluated on that metric when going up for promotions. Allowing people the latitude to pivot matters, because this would allow them to present less-than-linear agendas and still succeed as they advance in their careers.
Institutions might also adjust metrics to value alternative, non-traditional contributions that these academics make, such as community engagement. Marginalized scholars who find themselves silenced, might remain engaged in partnership with different communities, such as local organizations that serve the needs of marginalized communities. This work is often not as valued in the different stages of promotion but there is an argument that it should be, because it recognizes the societal impact of research.
If institutions act, they can protect a generation of researchers who deserve to have their voices, and their work, heard.
Raquel Muñiz, J.D., Ph.D. (associate professor, Boston College and 2026 EDU Ledger Emerging Scholar) is an empirical legal scholar focused on how law and policy constrain equity in education and the relationship between research and law, policy, and practice.
