Reflection on the Students’ Right to Freedom of Expression

When student voices meet political pressure—U.S. vs. Europe

Freedom of expression is a cornerstone of democracy, a fundamental right enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the European Convention on Human Rights. Throughout history, students have been at the forefront of political movements, using their voices to challenge injustice and advocate for change. Yet, recent events in the United States, where President Donald Trump has threatened to deport and fine students participating in protests and where were arrested or detained over 3100 students, raise questions about the boundaries of free speech in democratic societies.

Student activism has shaped political discourse from the civil rights movement in the U.S., including anti-Vietnam protests in 1969, to the May 1968 protests in France and the 1989 Velvet Revolution in Czechoslovakia. Universities have traditionally been spaces for debate and dissent, yet authorities often react with suppression when student voices challenge the status quo. The current threats in the U.S. highlight the ongoing tension between political activism and state control. Are these measures about enforcing immigration laws, or do they reflect an effort to stifle specific political viewpoints?

The legal and ethical dimensions of these threats are complex. The First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution protects freedom of speech and assembly, yet the application of these rights has never been absolute. The use of immigration laws to discourage political activism raises concerns about selective enforcement and the disproportionate targeting of international students. Could such measures create a chilling effect, preventing students from engaging in political discourse for fear of severe consequences?

In contrast, Europe offers a different approach. Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights guarantees the protection of the freedom of expression with specific restrictions. The European Court of Human Rights has consistently ruled to protect political expression, even when the views expressed are controversial or unpopular. The Court emphasized, “Freedom of expression constitutes one of the essential foundations of such a [democratic] society, one of the basic conditions for its progress and for the development of every man.[…] And it applies not only to ‘information’ or ‘ideas’ that are favorably received or regarded as inoffensive or as a matter of indifference, but also to those that offend, shock or disturb the State or any sector of the population. Such are the demands of that pluralism, tolerance and broadmindedness without which there is no ‘democratic society’.” (case Handyside v. United Kingdom, 1976, §49). However, the Court stressed the importance of the proportionality of any restrictions or conditions to the legitimate aim pursued, and the decisions from the Czech Constitutional Court also reinforce the notion.  

That said, even in democratic societies, students’ freedom of expression is unlimited. In the U.S., case law suggests that while students have speech protections, these rights are often uncertain. Generally, if their expression does not violate university regulations, incite violence, or promote illegal activity, it should be protected. Yet, the ambiguity surrounding these rights leaves room for restrictive interpretations. How far can authorities go before such restrictions undermine democratic principles?

The broader implications of criminalizing student activism extend beyond legal debates. When legal mechanisms are used to suppress dissent, the long-term impact on civic engagement can be profound. If students begin to self-censor out of fear, what does this mean for the future of democratic participation? European legal traditions emphasize that any restriction on free speech must be necessary and proportionate—an approach that safeguards against excessive limitations. Should the U.S. adopt a similar perspective towards students, ensuring that limits on student activism are justified rather than politically motivated? Or will the U.S. reaction towards students become a global trend?

These recent developments serve as a reminder that freedom of expression, even in well-established democracies, is never guaranteed. While Europe has historically upheld strong protections for student activism, no system is immune to regression. When political expression is met with legal threats, what does this say about the strength of democratic institutions? Protecting students’ rights to engage in political discourse is not just about defending individuals but also safeguarding the foundations of a free society.

Written by

Elmira Ljapina