Universities in modern America face a unique and growing challenge: how and when to censor on campus. This task becomes especially difficult when the topic centers around religion. Duke University is just the latest in a series of colleges who have made controversial decisions regarding free speech and religious practice on campus.
Duke, a prestigious university in North Carolina, is known for being a progressive, cutting edge research institution. The university’s early history has a notably religious background. The school was founded by Methodists and Quakers and its motto is Eruditio et Religio, or knowledge and faith; the most prominent building on campus is the Duke Chapel.
Despite its religious history, the university has been circulating on various news platforms this week because of the student government’s decision to reject Young Life, a potential Christian student organization, as an official group on campus. The student senate denied official university approval for Young Life “because it appeared to violate a guideline that every Duke student group include a nondiscrimination statement in its constitution.”
The organization in question is a Christian group with chapters across the US and internationally. The Young Life mission statement provided for Duke University read “We do not in any way wish to exclude persons who engage in sexual misconduct or who practice a homosexual lifestyle from being recipients of the ministry of God’s grace and mercy as expressed in Jesus Christ. We do, however, believe that such persons are not to serve as staff or volunteers in the mission and work of Young Life.” The group declined the option to revise their mission statement, at which point Duke’s student government voted unanimously against its approval.
Typically, legal precedent can shed some light on how institutions in America should address conflicts like this. Erik Baxter, a lawyer who specializes in defending freedom of religion, says that typically these cases side with the religious organization. He says that “most of the time universities back down because it’s a violation of students’ First Amendment rights.” However, Yonat Shimron, a writer for Religion News Service, notes that this may not be true in this case. She notes that Duke “may be in a different category as a private institution. Private universities don’t have the same obligations under the First Amendment’s free exercise clause that a government entity does.” Regardless of the legal outcome, decisions like this set the tone for college campuses across the US when they make decisions concerning student censorship.
Mcdonald, Amy. “Duke University: A Brief Narrative History.” Duke University Libraries, 29 Oct. 2018, library.duke.edu/rubenstein/uarchives/history/articles/narrative-history.
Shimron, Yonat. “Duke University’s Student Government Rejects Young Life over LGBTQ Policies.” Religion News Service, 13 Sept. 2019, religionnews.com/2019/09/13/duke-universitys-student-government-rejects-young-life-over-lgbtq-policies/.
contemporaryamericanreligion 
I find it interesting that the lawyer mentioned says that the Young Life group may not win their case because the institution is private rather than public. It is somewhat reminiscent of the controversy surrounding privately owned social media platforms that are often accused of censoring certain political groups. A more and more common argument I have been hearing is that Free Speech becomes eroded when large private organizations can suppress it. Theoretically, the same could be said for Freedom of Religion.
I am doubtful of how widespread the issue of, we’ll call it Private Censorship, is.
LikeLike