Academic Freedom Petition

Protect Academic Freedom, Vote No to Revising The Code

Context

This page archives the AAUP NC petition delivered to UNC System Board of Regents on Thursday, February 26, 2026.

More than a thousand individuals and organizations signed this petition before it was archived.

If you are an AAUP NC member interested in developing strategy and organizing around UNC System policies, contact AAUP NC Secretary David Ambaras (dambaras@gmail.com) to join the UNC System Policy Working Group.

If you are a UNC System instructor concerned about how changes in system policies impact you and your community, join the AAUP to participate in our collective actions to improve public higher education in our state.

Petition Intro

The UNC System Board of Governors will vote to amend the UNC System Code with new restrictions on academic freedom at its February 26 meeting.

This change is part of a broader effort to limit open inquiry and debate in higher education. Within the last two years: the UNC System stripped instructors of their intellectual property rights to syllabi; UNC-CH administrators failed to renew a professor's contract after secretly recording his class; and outside actors have threatened instructors online and in-person because they dislike the topics being taught.

Now, the Board of Governors plans to rewrite the very definition of academic freedom, restricting what faculty can say and do in their classrooms and in public.

These revisions to the UNC System Code will chill speech on campus and lead to more retaliation against faculty teaching or discussing politically contentious topics. The imprecise language in this policy will open the UNC System to lawsuits when faculty are retaliated against or fired.

It is easy to feel despondent in the face of attacks on our institutions, but we have the opportunity and the responsibility to act and make our opposition clear.

At the upcoming meeting on February 26, we will deliver a petition to the Board of Governors to reject this policy rewrite. We will meet in Raleigh to show that we will not stand by as this board threatens the core mission of our beloved UNCs.

Sign and share this petition!

Petition Language

To: UNC System Board of Governors

Dear Governor:

We, the undersigned, ask the Board of Governors of the University of North Carolina to reject proposed revisions to Chapter VI of the UNC System Code.

UNC Faculty Assembly blended multiple sources in October 2025 to define academic freedom in a manner consistent with the American Association of University Professors’ 1940 Statement of Principles on Academic Freedom and Tenure.

Faculty Assembly did not vote, however, on new academic freedom “parameters.” These constraints were added hastily in November and rushed through an insufficient review in December.

These revisions threaten the success and prestige of the UNC System. These revisions will unnecessarily expose the UNC System to future legal and financial risk through what the North Carolina Supreme Court recognizes as “Corum claims” - damages sought when the state violates constitutional rights.

As you know well, the North Carolina General Statutes state: “The primary function of each constituent institution is the discovery, improvement, transmission, and dissemination of knowledge by means of research, teaching, discussion, and debate. To fulfill this function, the constituent institution must strive to ensure the fullest degree of intellectual freedom and free expression.” (NC Gen. Stat. § 116-300)

The proposed revision to Chapter VI of The Code fails to safeguard this noble mandate. Instead it invites political interference and will chill research and teaching in areas deemed disfavorable or politically divisive.

As students, parents, alumni, staff, faculty, and community members, we call on you to protect academic freedom so the UNC System can continue to disseminate knowledge without interference from within or outside of the university. We urge you to adopt a policy on academic freedom based directly on the AAUP's Statement of Principles that has sustained North Carolina higher education for 85 years.

Vote against revisions to Chapter VI of The Code.

Media

Startwell, J. M. (2026, February 26). UNC System’s new definition of academic freedom approved over faculty objections. The News & Observer.

“People who come to this university to do research and teach do so with the expectation that they will be able to pursue the truth,” [AAUP NC Secretary] Ambaras said. “People who come to this university system to study do so with the expectation that they will get the quality education that the name UNC represents. A redefinition of the code to restrict academic freedom would damage that expectation. People would not be confident that they are coming here to learn freely. Parents would not be confident that they can send their children here to study freely, and faculty would not be confident that they could take jobs in the system in order to do their work freely.“Academic freedom has a definition that’s been accepted by the courts and by higher education, the sector as a whole. This is the first example we’re seeing of a university system trying to revise it downward, and we can’t accept that.”

Wooten, J. (2026, February 27). New 'academic freedom' rules will hurt teaching at UNC schools, professors say. Spectrum News.

Some professors at UNC system schools are worried new rules defining "academic freedom" will hurt teaching and restrict what instructors can say in classes. The UNC Board of Governors approved the change this week. Members of the American Association of University Professors North Carolina chapter delivered a petition with a little over 1,300 signatures, rejecting the board’s new academic freedom structure for state schools.

Denning, K. (2026, February 27). Consensus from Board of Governors on redefining UNC System academic freedom, but protesters disagree. Carolina Public Press.

The university system has championed the policy specifically because it creates clear guidelines on what behavior is and isn’t protected by academic freedom. [AAUP NC Interim Vice President] Hatcher acknowledged this and other aspects of the policy might seem appropriate but that expertise and academic training should be what decides what is taught and researched, not policies such as this one.“It should never actually be any administrator’s role to come in and say what can and cannot be taught,” Hatcher said. “So it kind of looks OK on paper, but the crux of it is that it’s paving the way for censorship in North Carolina that’s actually faster than Texas, Florida, Oklahoma.”

Dean, K. (2026, February 26). UNC System Board sets ‘parameters’ for academic freedom. Is shared governance next? The Assembly.

[AAUP NC Interim Vice President] Abigail Hatcher, a professor at UNC-Chapel Hill who delivered a petition against the policy to board Chair Wendy Murphy before the meeting started, said there was “no need” to rewrite the definition of a term that has long been defined by AAUP and other groups.“It would be the first rewrite that we’re aware of in the United States,” Hatcher said. “We do not want the UNC System to have this inauspicious title.”

Google Sites

Report abuse