IV 
108TH CONGRESS 
1ST SESSION 
H. CON. RES. 318
Expressing the sense of the Congress that American colleges and universities 
should adopt an Academic Bill of Rights to secure the intellectual inde-
pendence of faculty members and students and to protect the principle 
of intellectual diversity. 
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 
OCTOBER 30, 2003
Mr. KINGSTON (for himself, Mr. JONES of North Carolina, Mr. WICKER, Mr. 
ISTOOK, Mr. COX, Mr. PITTS, Mr. WILSON of South Carolina, Mr. DUN-
CAN, Mr. MCKEON, Mr. HERGER, Mr. MARIO DIAZ-BALART of Florida, 
Mr. HAYWORTH, Mr. LEWIS of Kentucky, Mr. WELDON of Pennsylvania, 
Mr. GINGREY, Mr. BARTLETT of Maryland, Mr. OSBORNE, and Mr. 
POMBO) submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was re-
ferred to the Committee on Education and the Workforce 
CONCURRENT RESOLUTION 
Expressing the sense of the Congress that American colleges 
and universities should adopt an Academic Bill of Rights 
to secure the intellectual independence of faculty mem-
bers and students and to protect the principle of intellec-
tual diversity.
Whereas the central purposes of a university are the pursuit 
of truth, the discovery of new knowledge through scholar-
ship and research, the study and reasoned criticism of in-
tellectual and cultural traditions, the teaching and gen-
eral development of students to help them become cre-
ative individuals and productive citizens of a pluralistic
•HCON 318 IH 
democracy, and the transmission of knowledge and learn-
ing to a society at large; 
Whereas free inquiry and free speech within the academic 
community are indispensable to the achievement of the 
central purposes of a university, the freedoms to teach 
and to learn depend upon the creation of appropriate 
conditions and opportunities on the campus as a whole as 
well as in the classrooms and lecture halls, and these pur-
poses reflect the values of pluralism, diversity, oppor-
tunity, critical intelligence, openness, and fairness that 
are the cornerstones of American society; 
Whereas academic freedom and intellectual diversity are val-
ues indispensable to an American university; 
Whereas from its first formulation in the General Report of 
the Committee on Academic Freedom and Tenure of the 
American Association of University Professors, the con-
cept of academic freedom has been premised on the ideas 
that human knowledge is a never-ending pursuit of the 
truth, that there is no humanly accessible truth that is 
not in principle open to challenge, and that no party or 
intellectual faction has a monopoly on wisdom; 
Whereas academic freedom is most likely to thrive in an envi-
ronment of intellectual diversity that protects and fosters 
independence of thought and speech; 
Whereas in the words of the general report, it is vital to pro-
tect ‘‘as the first condition of progress, [a] complete and 
unlimited freedom to pursue inquiry and publish its re-
sults’’; 
Whereas free inquiry and its fruits are crucial to the demo-
cratic enterprise, and academic freedom is a national 
value;
•HCON 318 IH 
Whereas in Keyishian v. Board of Regents of the University 
of the State of New York, a historic 1967 decision, the 
Supreme Court overturned a New York State loyalty pro-
vision for teachers with these words: ‘‘Our Nation is 
deeply committed to safeguarding academic freedom, [a] 
transcendent value to all of us and not merely to the 
teachers concerned’’; 
Whereas in Sweezy v. New Hampshire in 1957, the Supreme 
Court observed that the ‘‘essentiality of freedom in the 
community of American universities [was] almost self-evi-
dent’’; 
Whereas academic freedom consists of protecting the intellec-
tual independence of professors, researchers, and stu-
dents in the pursuit of knowledge and the expression of 
ideas from interference by legislators or authorities with-
in the institution itself, meaning that no political, ideolog-
ical, or religious orthodoxy should be imposed on profes-
sors and researchers through the hiring, tenure, or termi-
nation process, nor through any other administrative 
means by the academic institution, nor should the legisla-
ture impose any such orthodoxy through its control of the 
university budget; 
Whereas it has long been recognized that intellectual inde-
pendence means the protection of students and faculty 
members from the imposition of any orthodoxy of a polit-
ical, ideological, or religious nature; 
Whereas the 1915 Declaration of Principles of the American 
Association of University Professors admonished faculty 
members to avoid ‘‘taking unfair advantage of the stu-
dent’s immaturity by indoctrinating him with the teach-
er’s own opinions before the student has had an oppor-
tunity fairly to examine other opinions upon the matters