In 1787, Thomas Jefferson declared that “The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.” George Mason — the founding father for whom GMU is named — championed the right to resist tyranny, penning the 1776 Virginia Declaration of Rights that helped inspire the First Amendment.
Fast forward 250 years, and GMU is calling the police on a student for daring to echo those revolutionary sentiments in modern terms.
It seems GMU has forgotten its namesake’s legacy. So here’s a reminder: calling the cops over political commentary has no place at an American university bound by the First Amendment.
On April 16, GMU student Nicholas Decker published a Substack essay titled “When Must We Kill Them?,” a provocative piece exploring whether violence is ever justified as a last resort against what he perceives as tyranny under the Trump administration. The essay explicitly warns that force is only defensible when all peaceful and legal avenues have been exhausted. Decker invokes the founding fathers to argue that violence “is to be employed only in defense of our Constitution, and of democracy.”
The next day, GMU referred Decker to “state and federal law enforcement for evaluation of criminal behavior” and denounced his essay as “not the Mason way.” Then came a knock at Decker’s door from the Secret Service. After reviewing his words, they agreed he broke no laws.
GMU’s overreaction has sent a dangerous message: write something controversial, and the feds might show up at your door. That’s chilling and, frankly, un-American.
A university dedicated to free thought should know better. The First Amendment draws a clear line between unprotected “true threats” and core political speech. Speech is only a true threat when it demonstrates a serious, specific, and imminent intent to commit unlawful violence against a particular individual or group. That’s a high bar — and for good reason. It’s meant to protect public debate, especially about uncomfortable topics. Advocacy for violence, no matter how disturbing, remains protected unless it crosses that line.
Decker’s essay never comes close. It’s abstract, hypothetical, and lacks any indication of intent to commit violence. Asking about the moral propriety of force is philosophy, not a true threat. And while deeply offensive speech may upset many, that doesn’t make it unlawful, as intense political debate will inevitably offend someone.
But it should never have come to this. GMU’s overreaction has sent a dangerous message: write something controversial, and the feds might show up at your door. That’s chilling and, frankly, un-American. When administrators start acting like King George III, they’ve lost their way. Ironically, GMU’s behavior resembles that of UK speech police, where citizens are arrested for criticizing public officials online.
Thankfully, in America, the First Amendment answers the question of whether robust political debate is “criminal behavior.” Students expressing themselves on public issues is very much “the Mason way.” FIRE calls on GMU to ensure this mistake does not become an accepted practice.
FIRE defends the rights of students and faculty members — no matter their views — at public and private universities and colleges in the United States. If you are a student or a faculty member facing investigation or punishment for your speech, submit your case to FIRE today. If you’re a faculty member at a public college or university, call the Faculty Legal Defense Fund 24-hour hotline at 254-500-FLDF (3533). If you’re a college journalist facing censorship or a media law question, call the Student Press Freedom Initiative 24-hour hotline at 717-734-SPFI (7734).
