Pride flags removed from BU offices spark free speech debate

Local news

Faculty and students are challenging Boston University’s removal of Pride flags, arguing that enforcing a “content-neutral” banner policy undermines freedom of expression.

While many were away for spring break two weeks ago, Boston University officials removed pride flags from three locations on campus, sparking renewed debate over free speech, institutional politics, and the visibility of the LGBTQ+ community.

The flags were displayed in the Women’s, Gender, and Sexuality Studies offices at 704 Commonwealth Avenue, in Professor Liz Pettini’s office in the Wheelock College of Education and Human Development, and in Professor Nathan Phillips’ office in the College of Arts and Sciences.

Its removal was the culmination of a months-long dispute between faculty and administration over the university’s signage rules.

Officials first requested the pride flags be removed in August 2025, said Joseph Harris, co-president of the BU chapter of the American Association of University Professors. Applications continued until SeptemberBy December, the issue had a college campus raging He objects.

University officials said the removals were part of law enforcement Boston University Events and Demonstrations Policywhich restricts signage in outward-facing windows. According to the policy, “Materials may not be affixed to any university-owned property, including walls, windows, or furniture” when visible from the outside.

BU spokesman Colin Reilly said in a statement that the policy applies equally to all forms of signage.

“This is a content-neutral policy, which means any signs must be removed, and implementation of the policy is neither an endorsement nor a rejection of any point of view,” he said. “We are committed to ensuring that BU is an inclusive, welcoming, and supportive community, and there are many ways to express and demonstrate our values ​​in alignment with policies.”

However, Mary Battenfeld, co-president of BU AAUP, said enforcement of the policy is not “content neutral,” as other posters, such as Taylor Swift’s, have not been removed from public-facing windows.

“When you tell students, when you tell faculty, when you tell staff, when you give the message that you can’t express your opinion, it’s anti-free speech. It’s anti-democratic,” she said.

Faculty responded by sending letters to BU President Melissa Gilliam. Among them was Keith Vincent, an associate professor in the Department of Women’s, Gender, and Sexuality Studies who identifies as gay.

“It felt like a punch in the gut,” he said. “I felt a little violated because they actually went into our space and took it down.”

As of Tuesday, Vincent had not received a response to his letter.

“Their position is untenable,” he added.

“Vision can save a life”

For Vincent and others, the issue extends beyond policy interpretation to include student well-being. He said the pride flags are a clear signal of support for LGBTQ+ students — many of whom feel isolated.

“People don’t understand how coming out for LGBT people can be life-saving, so putting these flags out there sends a really important message,” he said. “And I don’t understand why the university would want to mess with this.”

“University accredited”Living our valuesThese values ​​are consistent with the symbolic meaning of the pride flag, said Harris, co-president of the Arab American League.

In November 2025, the Women’s, Gender, and Sexuality Studies program issued a “Pride Flag Statement,” detailing the history of the flag and its importance to students, Harris said.

“Pride flags have a special status. They indicate safe haven. They indicate welcome. They indicate acceptance,” he said. “For communities that have historically faced a lot of stigma, this can be really important.”

Research conducted by Professor Julia Reifman at the Boston University School of Public Health Harris said the relics indicate that the effects extend beyond symbolism. According to research, LGBTQ+ teens are three times more likely to report recent suicide attempts than their heterosexual peers, and institutional policies that signal inclusion are directly linked to decreased mental health inequity.

The administration defends a “neutral content” policy.

At an administrative meeting Thursday, which faculty were not formally invited to attend but AU members took note of, Gilliam, the university president, called the window-facing displays a “privilege,” according to Harris. She stressed that the university was not targeting any specific group and described Boston University’s approach as “less harsh” than policies at other institutions.

This framework has drawn criticism.

“Freedom of expression is protected in the Constitution, and to suggest that self-expression is a privilege, I think that really raises a problem,” Harris said.

Criticism has expanded beyond the campus. on monday Boston City Council hearing Organized by students through the Education Committee, dozens of speakers called for greater transparency, student representation and protection of expression across schools in Massachusetts.

One doctoral student at Boston University, who identified himself only as Michael and said he was gay, discussed the process of removing the flag on his campus.

“The Pride flag is a symbol of acceptance, tolerance, welcome, openness, progress and love,” he said. “We are under this constant threat right now. Universities are not taking us seriously.”

On Tuesday, university officials spoke with BU Today, Address frequently asked questions about the policy And the controversy surrounding it. Officials stressed that the policy is not new and does not restrict freedom of expression or signage inside campus buildings.

Officials said some exterior signs remain because the university is prioritizing direct communication and dialogue rather than immediate removal.

“For this reason, implementation may not always appear uniform at a given moment,” the post said. “In some cases, the screen may remain in place while you are having a conversation.”

According to university officials, the outward-facing signs are subject to removal because they could be perceived as representing the views of the institution.

“Individuals can say what they want, but they are talking about themselves, not the university,” the post read. “The outward-facing signage policy is designed to prevent individuals from speaking on behalf of the organization.”

The broader political context

Battenfield, co-president of the AAUP, noted that the initial requests to remove the pride flags came during a period of heightened national debate about LGBTQ+ rights and diversity initiatives. She pointed to actions taken by the Trump administration, including executive orders targeting transgender individuals and broader efforts to combat DEI, as contributing to a climate of anxiety.

“It was all very upsetting – not just what happened, but that [the university] “She chose to do it at that particular moment,” she said.

Battenfield also referred to an announcement by Labeling the Human Rights Campaign The current moment is a national emergency for LGBTQ+ Americans. Locally, she pointed to incidents including the theft of flags honoring murdered trans people from Boston Common and the removal of Pride displays in several Boston neighborhoods, including Jamaican plain and Roslindale.

“Boston University does not want to associate itself with this kind of hate,” she said. “And I feel like this policy does that, and the students understand that.”

Legal questions and limits of freedom of expression

Because Boston University is a private institution, the First Amendment does not directly apply; However, legal experts say the situation may still raise concerns under Massachusetts law.

Naomi SchatzThe Boston-based attorney, who represents students in discrimination cases, noted Massachusetts Civil Rights Lawwhich prohibits interference with constitutional or legal rights through coercion, intimidation, or threats — even by private entities.

“If BU is restricting free speech, and they are doing so in a threatening or coercive manner, that may violate Massachusetts civil rights law,” she said. “These professors can bring claims under the law against Boston University, even though it is a private institution.”

The key question is whether the university is applying its policies consistently and in good faith, Schatz said.

“If they don’t enforce it uniformly, you’re going to have discrimination concerns and issues where they’re censoring people based on content,” she said.

Harris referred to the ruling in Abramowitz v. Trustees of Boston Universitywhere a Suffolk Superior Court judge ruled against the university after officials entered student rooms without consent to remove anti-segregation signs. In this case, the court found that the university’s actions violated Massachusetts civil rights law.

Schatz also questioned whether the events and demonstrations policy was being used appropriately in this context. She said the language seemed to focus on organized events rather than everyday office displays.

“They don’t actually have a policy prohibiting hanging flags in your office window, but they’re trying to have a policy that has nothing to do with this issue and kind of put it on top of this situation where it doesn’t actually fit,” she said. “For me, this raises concerns.”

Looking forward

Battenfield said she would like to work with officials to review the policy — along the lines of Harvard did.

Meanwhile, Harris said the AAUP chapter is organizing a petition targeting students, faculty, alumni and other stakeholders to raise awareness and push for change.

“We would like to see our president succeed, and for her many visions to flourish — as well as for the university itself,” he said. “We think people will continue to care about this, will speak out, and we hope to see some efforts to reach a solution that includes support for free speech.”

Vincent said Boston University should allow flags to fly, regardless of whether they are “problematic” or “obnoxious.”

“Let people criticize it,” he said. “Let there be a strong discourse about it.” “Don’t preemptively remove them. I think that’s the best policy for a place that supposedly values ​​diversity.”