In the United States, free speech is widely embraced as a value and a constitutional virtue. Yet the commitment to free speech is not self-enforcing. Bitter conflicts occur over its meaning and application. Why are there so many battles about free speech? In this course, we focus on battles about speech in politics and on arguments about free expression in academic institutions. We first aim to define and assess free speech. Then we consider possible grounds for limiting expression – on behalf of equality, order, and democratic self-governance. Regarding equality – should speech be limited when it arguably depicts specific groups as unworthy and even dangerous? What lines can be drawn among vocal support for a political position, advocacy of illegal and violent action in support of that position, ‘real’ threats, and illegal political action? Should limits be imposed on forms of expression that allegedly undermine democratic processes? In arguments about these issues, different concepts of free speech compete. Does: free speech enable people to express and develop themselves in ways vital to democracy? Are free speech and expression basic to intellectual and personal growth? Does free speech need boundaries to protect the positions and views of vulnerable and disadvantaged groups? Should free speech mainly serve to contest power relations? How should we assess these views?