On Aug. 30, nine masked pro-Palestinian protesters entered a Cal Poly San Luis Obispo classroom where two wounded Israeli veterans were scheduled to speak. They chanted and held signs accusing Israel of genocide. Campus police invoked the university’s policy regarding protests and moved them from the classroom and ultimately outside, where they remained free to demonstrate. Some protesters later directly challenged the speakers.
That is exactly how campus protest rules are supposed to work. The protesters were free to express their views. They were not free to prevent someone else’s event from taking place or to interfere with other students’ access to a campus building.
California strengthened those protections in 2024, after post-Oct. 7 protests repeatedly crossed the line from expression into disruption, intimidation, exclusion and harassment. The state enacted a law reinforcing reasonable, content-neutral campus protest rules and their enforcement. Those content-neutral rules are known as “time, place and manner restrictions.”
Now Gov. Gavin Newsom must decide whether to sign a bill backed by a faculty union that openly wants to dismantle those rules.
AB 2551 would require the California State University and ask the University of California to submit an annual report to the Legislature specifically about any protest-related discipline of students. The bill would also require CSU and request that UC each host a one-time student forum about the protest rules and how they are applied before the end of 2027.
An earlier version went much further. It would have repealed the 2024 protections outright. After that provision was removed, Jewish California, the state’s largest coalition of Jewish organizations, withdrew its opposition of AB 2551 and moved to neutral. But the remaining provisions are far from benign. By singling out protest discipline for special reporting and creating a forum focused specifically on the rules and how they are applied, AB 2551 gives students who object to those restrictions a dedicated venue to press universities to weaken how they are enforced, without repealing them outright.
The bill’s principal backer, the California Faculty Association (CFA), which represents California State University faculty, has made clear where it wants that pressure to lead. At a Senate Education Committee hearing, its legislative action chair called AB 2551 a “first step towards ending time, place and manner restrictions.”
What happened at Cal Poly shows exactly what is at stake. The rules that CFA wants to end did not silence the protesters. The rules allowed the event to proceed, protected other students’ access to the building and still left the protesters free to demonstrate and challenge the speakers.
CFA has framed its opposition to these rules as a defense of free speech and academic freedom. But Cal Poly demonstrates the opposite: Reasonable, content-neutral rules allow people with vehemently opposing views to exercise their rights without giving either side the power to silence the other.
CFA’s campaign against those rules is especially troubling because the union is hardly a neutral referee in this fight.
In April 2025, the union adopted a resolution demanding that the California State University “immediately and permanently terminate” study-abroad programs in Israel and end academic and cultural partnerships with Israeli universities. That is an academic boycott, an effort to enlist the university’s academic programs and relationships in a political campaign against Israel.
That resolution does more than establish CFA’s political stake in this fight. It also exposes the hypocrisy of its argument. CFA invokes free speech and academic freedom to challenge neutral rules governing protest while embracing an academic boycott that would undermine those same freedoms for students and faculty seeking academic engagement with Israel.
Taken together, CFA’s stated position on the underlying conflict and the hypocrisy of its free-speech argument make clear that its campaign against these rules is not genuinely a defense of expressive freedom. Through its academic boycott campaign, CFA is itself helping fuel the anti-Israel activism that has too often crossed into discrimination, exclusion and harassment of Jewish and pro-Israel students — even as it seeks to weaken the rules meant to protect them.
California’s campus protest rules should apply equally to pro-Palestinian, pro-Israel and all other lawful political advocacy. The incident at Cal Poly just showed that those rules do not suppress protest. They preserve the ability of everyone on campus to speak, listen and participate.
Newsom should not give CFA a legislative foothold in its effort to dismantle those protections. He must veto AB 2551.
Related
J. covers our community better than any other source and provides news you can’t find elsewhere. Support local Jewish journalism and give to J. today. Your donation will help J. survive and thrive!