>> Continued From the Previous Page <<
Interestingly, students at Utah Valley University were slightly less likely to embrace that belief, though the difference was modest. Among UVU respondents, 46 percent said they “completely” or “mostly” agreed with the same sentiment, signaling that nearly half of students at the site of the assassination still accept the idea that speech itself can be equated with physical harm.
FIRE noted that students appear to view political violence as a widespread issue cutting across ideological lines. As the organization explained, “Students were also more likely than the general public to say political violence is a bipartisan problem, suggesting a broader sense of threat but perhaps also a more universal framing of the issue.”
Still, the results reveal contradictions. The survey suggests many students struggle to separate political speech from actual violence—a mindset that mirrors views reportedly held by Tyler Robinson, the progressive alleged shooter responsible for Kirk’s killing. Critics argue this conflation creates a dangerous environment where silencing opponents becomes morally justified.
When asked to assign blame, Utah Valley students were more willing than students nationwide to say that “political violence is a problem among progressives.” Thirty-four percent of UVU students agreed with that statement, compared to 28 percent nationally.
However, both Utah Valley students and those from other colleges were more likely to say that “political violence is a problem among conservatives,” with 42 percent of respondents in both groups agreeing. These perceptions persist despite data showing that left-wing political violence has been responsible for numerous recent attacks and disruptions.
At the same time, slight majorities of students across the board agreed that “political violence is a problem among all political groups,” reinforcing the idea that students feel surrounded by hostility—real or perceived—from every direction.
Perhaps the most concerning takeaway from the survey is its finding that fear is now driving widespread self-censorship. Before the assassination, 24 percent of Utah Valley students said they held back their views during classroom discussions, according to FIRE’s College Free Speech Rankings. That number has now jumped to 34 percent.
FIRE says this shift is not limited to one campus. The organization concluded that “the assassination has had a chilling effect — not just at UVU, but across the country.”
The fear goes beyond the classroom. As FIRE warned, “Students say they are pulling back, are speaking less, and are less comfortable attending events. This is not being done in response to policy, but because of fear.”
The group closed with a blunt warning for university leaders and lawmakers alike. “If campus leaders, faculty, and policymakers want to protect academic freedom and open inquiry, they must reckon with that fear, and work to rebuild a culture of expression that can withstand not just controversy, but crisis.”
As colleges continue to frame speech as danger and disagreement as trauma, critics argue the true casualty may be the First Amendment itself—silenced not by law, but by intimidation and ideological conformity.
