A spike over the last two years in campus demonstrations around the Israel‑Hamas conflict, racial justice, political divides, and free‑speech debates has prompted U.S. universities to tighten protest rules. As students reclaim outdoor spaces, institutions are rewriting what protesting will look like in 2025 and beyond, including who gets to do it, and how.

Insight looked at how U.S. universities responded to the rise in campus protests by updating their policies on free speech, encampments, and student activism. For most institutions, there have been key policy changes—such as time, place, and manner restrictions, permit requirements, disciplinary actions, and new legislation. 

Higher education leaders, student affairs professionals, legal scholars, faculty, and student organizers should find this information especially valuable for understanding the evolving boundaries of protest and free speech on college campuses.

Encampments and Structures: Mostly Forbidden

Many institutions firmly prohibit tents or overnight camping on school grounds.

• The University of Utah states: “It is unlawful to set up structures or camp overnight on University of Utah property,” reinforcing that free speech does not include encampments, as reported by The New York Post.

• On its website, Princeton University administration emphasizes that its “time, place, and manner” policy enforces a “clear and explicit prohibition upon encampments,” stating that “camping in vehicles, tents, or other structures is not permitted on campus.”

• Dartmouth College, per its president’s communications after spring 2024’s pro‑Gaza encampments, disciplined students who defied their bans.
• Columbia’s recently announced suspensions and expulsions for those blocking access and ignoring procedures after a May 2025 library takeover.
  

Time, Place and Manner Restrictions

Universities are setting narrow windows and specific zones for protest, often mirroring public‑forum doctrines.

• UC Davis’ Freedom of Expression Policy states that time, place, and manner regulations are “reasonable limitations,” enforced in open areas like the quad, with registered student organizations (RSOs) required to follow them.
  
• The University of Virginia’s updated demonstration guidelines specify that “no outdoor events are permitted on grounds between 2 a.m. and 6 a.m.” and require that activities “do not restrict equal access.”
  
• SUNY Empire’s policy affirms that while expression must be enabled, its “time, place, and manner” cannot disrupt campus safety or operations. 

Notification, Permits, and ID Checks

Advance notice requirements are increasingly common, along with ID checks.

• Columbia’s conduct handbook instructs event organizers to notify Public Safety and University Life “no later than at the time of their public announcement,” and requires compliance with “time, place, and manner” limits, including sound.
  

Noise and Signage Curbs

Adjustment of amplification and display rules has grown more widespread.

• Columbia’s conduct code explains that while amplification is permitted, it must not “interrupt academic activities in the surrounding areas.”
  
• Student‑run media at UC Davis highlight the university’s reliance on similar rules when students install tents, citing health and sanitation risks alongside opacity in defining “disruption.”
  

Why These Measures?

1. Operational disruption: Administrators report blocked walkways, sanitation concerns, and interference with academic functions. UC Davis highlighted health risks tied to encampments.
   
2. Legal compliance: Public universities leverage constitutional time, place, and manner doctrine, while private schools use conduct codes to address harassment and disruption. 

3. Safety:  Concerns regarding harassment, escalation into violence, and weapons in states where firearms are permitted.  

4. Legislative pressure: Texas lawmakers introduced SB 2972 in 2025, which would forbid camping, mask-wearing during protests, and nighttime expressing on public campuses. Critics argue it could chill free speech; supporters say it ensures order. 

Advocacy Concerns and Campus Tensions

Critics fear regulations are becoming overly restrictive.

• The Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression argues some rules go “far beyond” constitutional limits by delegating vague enforcement to university officials, according to The Houston Chronicle. 
• Columbia faces criticism for investigating students over pro‑Palestinian speech and op‑eds; some argue it has morphed into a “speech‑suppression” mechanism, according to a Time magazine article.  
• The American Association of University Professors (AAUP) issued a statement last summer, saying the new protest policies are “overly restrictive, undermine academic freedom, and violate the First Amendment.”

Balancing Voice and Order

Some schools pilot pre‑emptive communication strategies instead of hard lines.

• According to their website, UC Davis implemented faculty‑student engagement teams to discuss demands during the 2024 quad encampment.
  
• Dartmouth expanded open‑forum programming under its “Dartmouth Dialogues” initiative, aiming to foster discussion without protest escalation, as detailed by an article in The New York Times.
  

What’s Next in 2025

Universities entering the next academic year face a critical juncture. The popularity of overnight encampments during peak protest seasons continues to test institutional resolve. As states weigh new laws like Texas SB 2972 (known as the “Campus Protection Act,” which imposes significant restrictions on protest activities at public colleges and universities) and campus policies evolve, the debate over preserving protesters’ rights while maintaining academic order intensifies.

Will universities rely on bans and surveillance? Or will more options like engagement, clear permitting rules, and robust communication prevail? Stay tuned.