1/ Almost three years after the passage of the Higher Education (Freedom of Speech) Act 2023, its complaints scheme provision finally looks set to come into force this autumn. And the new registration conditions will follow next April.

How did we get here? A (long) thread.🧵
2/ On 12 May 2021, the Higher Education (Freedom of Speech) Bill was formally introduced in the House of Commons by Gavin Williamson, the Secretary of State for Education.

It was a response to the censorship culture that had taken hold in British universities.

1/ This is the thread on my recollections and impressions of Day 3 (the final day) of Sussex v OfS.

Glossary:
BC: Chris Buttler, Barrister for Claimant
BD: Monica Carss-Frisk, Barrister for Defendant
J: Nathalie Lieven, Judge
TNBEPS: Trans and Non-Binary Equality Policy

https://x.com/ObhishekSaha/status/2019119534473637912

2/ We begin with some book-keeping.

J asks BD to send her, within seven days, the so-far not disclosed "detailed" version (providing the reasoning and full structure) of the final decision OfS took when it issued the Sussex fine.

J also asks BD to respond to the claim made earlier by BC that Sussex was told in 2018 by OfS that its governing documents were fine. In response to this, BD clarifies that the OfS did not assess the documents at that time, but instead told Sussex that it relies on providers’ self-assessment, while reserving the right to investigate universities later for breach.

J notes that having read the pre-HERA Green and White Papers overnight, she was surprised they did not say anything about the infringement of visitorial jurisdiction, which rubs against BD's arguments on Ground 2. BD replies that this is unsurprising, since those papers were forward-looking and did not expressly set out all necessary implications. But the clear implication of those documents, she says, is that visitorial jurisdiction is abrogated — otherwise HERA would lose its very purpose.

1/ Thread on Day 2 of Sussex vs OfS, the most consequential case for free speech and academic freedom in a generation. 2/ A brief recap: Sussex is challenging, by way of judicial review in the High Court, the £585,000 fine imposed by the OfS. The challenge advances six grounds, with several sub-parts, as set out below.

1/ THREAD on Day 1 of Sussex vs OfS. The most vital case on free speech and academic freedom in a generation. Yes, I was in court all day.

Glossary (as used below):

BC = Chris Buttler KC, Barrister for Claimant (Sussex)
J = Dame Nathalie Lieven, Judge

https://twitter.com/ObhishekSaha/status/2017568595425767650

2/ BC opening statement:

Uni is committed to Academic Freedom and takes no stand on GC issues. It was student protests that led Stock to leave. But as UUK says in its witness statement: "In order for AF/FS to flourish...argument is required, but so are respect and stability."

🧵1/ In three days’ time, arguments will begin in the London High Court for the most consequential case on free speech and academic freedom in a generation: University of Sussex v Office for Students. 2/ Why is this judicial review so important?

Because it goes to the heart of the OfS's robust interpretation of the legal framework to protect free speech and academic freedom in English Universities.

The judgement has the potential to either reinforce or destroy this.

🧵1/ Manchester Metropolitan University currently has a job advert out that, in my opinion, does not comply with the duty of the university to secure freedom of speech and academic freedom. 2/ The job description requires the role-holder to commit to promoting equity in their area and in their personal conduct. It also requires commitment to various other values.

🧵1/ The Higher Education (Freedom of Speech) Act, whose main provisions come into force from August 1, requires universities to -- A1) secure, A2) have a code of practice around, A3) promote the importance of -- free speech and academic freedom. 2/ Last week, the OfS released robust and detailed guidance around A1 and A2. But no guidance was issued around the A3 duty -- nor was such guidance expected.

So what's happening with the "promote duty"?

timeshighereducation.com/opinion/ofs-ne…

🧵1/ Research England -- the main public body responsible for providing funding to English universities for research and knowledge exchange -- has published an equality, diversity and inclusion (EDI) action plan.

It's quite something. THREAD. 2/ The Action Plan is clear about the ultimate vision of Research Englan: "a diverse and inclusive research and knowledge exchange system", "embedding EDI practices", "promote diversity and inclusivity".

What is missing? A commitment to excellence, quality or merit.

🧵1/ The rise of EDI in UK universities has been shaped by a combination of legal, intellectual, economic, and cultural factors.

In this thread I describe a key event that took place in 2005. 2/ The story begins in 2001, with the creation of the Equality Challenge Unit (ECU) to further equality and diversity in UK universities. The main funder of the ECU was the Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE).

🧵1/ The Sussex VC, Sasha Roseneil, has vowed to challenge the @officestudents fine in court, on the grounds that the offending Trans policy was not a “governing document” of the university.

Short thread on why I think the VC is wrong.

theguardian.com/education/2025… 2/ According to the VC, “The whole case rests on it being a governing document....we have many dozens, if not hundreds, of similar policies and statements. Whereas the governing documents of the university are its charter and statutes and regulations."

🧵Quick thoughts on this.
1/7 The University was found in breach of the E1 and E2 conditions on governance. The OfS did not investigate the specific issues around the curtailment of academic freedom of @Docstockk because it did not have those powers.
bbc.com/news/articles/… 2/ This will change when the main duties of the Higher Education (Freedom of Speech) Act come into effect on August 1, 2025. Universities will have a clearly defined legal duty to take reasonably practicable steps to secure the academic freedom of staff.

🧵1/ "The Nobel Committee’s decision [to award (in 1919) the 1918 Chemistry Prize to Fritz Haber] ignored the well-known fact that Haber, a German scientist, had been active during the war in the creation and use of the first chemical gas that ushered into the world the new era of chemical warfare in 1915. Once made public, the decision of the Nobel Foundation immediately aroused indignation, especially in France and Belgium where thousands of their soldiers had been killed or crippled by chlorine and mustard gas....But the Committee considered that science had to be evaluated only on its own merit and not on the basis of the personal qualities of the scientists who were honored." 2/ "Engineering professor Valery Fabrikant, who in 1992 killed four of his colleagues and injured a secretary on the Concordia University campus in Montreal. Serving a life sentence, he nevertheless continued his theoretical research and published many articles in recognized peer-reviewed academic journals, his institutional address indicating his prison cell....Fabrikant, while still living out a life sentence, has continued to write scientific papers and, according to bibliometric data from the Web of Science, published nearly sixty articles between 1996 and 2021, scattered across nearly twenty different peer-reviewed journals. And though, from 2003 to 2020 the address of the author identifies him as “Prisoner 167932 D,” this has not precluded these papers from being cited over time."

1/ "Searching for clues as to how Arif Ahmed has spent his 20 or so months as director for freedom of speech and academic freedom on the Office for Students (OfS) website yields slim pickings."

This is my only quibble with this overall excellent piece. 🧵

https://twitter.com/timeshighered/status/1881239023315820599

2/ In fact, the OfS website released two long, remarkable documents for consultation in the period before the Act was paused.

They bear Ahmed's mark all over.

🧵 1/ Thread on final session of the Censorship in Science conference. First speaker is Jesse Singal @jessesingal, who will talk about how soft censorship has helped make the USA an outlier on youth gender medicine. 2/ Singal: Journalism around youth gender medicine is broken.

Youth gender medicine arrived in the the US around 2007 and soon exploded.

*Currently almost no evidence that benefits outweigh costs* Accurate reporting in mainstream US outlets almost doesn't exist.

1/🧵 THREAD on today's morning sessions. The final day of the amazing Censorship in the Sciences conference. Wilfred Reilly @wil_da_beast630, who needs no introduction, kicks it off with his plenary talk. The topic: Taboo 2/ Reilly: Dominant narratives are variations of the blank slate paradigm and/or concern various kinds of narratives of oppression: police violence, trans etc.

But there is a well-documented reality that there is a complete opposite of what we are supposed to say.

2/ Krylov mentions the ongoing wildfires and the importance of uncensored debate on important current problems. A goal of this conference is to understand censorship better, so that we fear it less. 3/ Plenary talk by Jonathan Rauch begins. "Who are we, and why am I here?" We are here to defend the delicate system of rules that allows us to translate disagreement and debate into knowledge. Freedom and independence aren't enough, we also need the Constitution of Knowledge.

🧵1/ Hate speech laws must be abolished, but more is required to protect free speech in the UK. A thread.

https://twitter.com/toadmeister/status/1858198787975737748

2/ As @glukianoff has pointed out, the bright line between action and speech is one of the most important concepts devised by humanity. It has been an engine for peace, progress and the pursuit of knowledge for centuries. eternallyradicalidea.com/p/why-the-word…

🧵On July 26, Bridget Phillipson stopped further commencement of the Higher Education (Freedom of Speech) Act. A thread documenting the happenings since then.

https://twitter.com/ObhishekSaha/status/1816758031167705226

The decision to pause the Act was announced just two working days before parliament went on summer recess. To have any hope of salvaging the Act, free speech advocates would need to ensure that this ghastly decision stayed in the news cycle for as long as possible.

🧵1/ A thread on free speech.

These are a few things I would have liked to say on the @TimesRadio show today if there was more time! @edvaizey @DannyStone1

https://twitter.com/ObhishekSaha/status/1820866023454875658

2/ For the pursuit of truth, we need the freedom to express all opinions, and the silencing of an opinion, whether wrong or right, robs all of us.

🧵1/ This is a personal thread.

It is also a tale of two ministers.

One of them shepherded over the line the most significant bill on academic freedom in living memory.

The other released a written statement at 9:40 am today, killing it. 2/ In Dec 2022, the situation with the Higher Education Freedom of Speech Bill seemed dire. The House of Lords, under lobbying from university VCs, had just voted to scrap its statutory tort provision.

This was a key provision of the bill, one that gave it real teeth.

1/ Short thread on some of my favourite recent journal articles on the politicisation & censorship of science. If you are interested in science, care about academic freedom, or have an academic or administrative role in any kind of higher education, you may like to read these.🧵

https://twitter.com/SteveStuWill/status/1799625064339636324

2/ "The peril of politicising science" (2021) by Anna Krylov. A beautiful, deeply personal essay that lays out the stakes. If you haven't read it, please do so, you won't regret it. pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/ac…