Rutgers University has found itself at the epicenter of a fierce debate over academic freedom, campus safety, and the ideological schisms dividing higher education. The controversy, which erupted in October 2025, centers on Mark Bray, an assistant teaching professor known for his outspoken support of Antifa and his authorship of Antifa: The Anti-Fascist Handbook. The saga has drawn in students, faculty, outside commentators, and university leadership, each staking out positions that reflect the broader national tensions over free expression and political activism on campus.
It all began when the Turning Point USA (TPUSA) chapter at Rutgers launched a petition calling for Bray’s removal. TPUSA, a conservative student organization, cited Bray’s ties to Antifa and his public support for confrontational tactics as grounds for dismissal. According to Fox News, TPUSA’s petition quickly became a lightning rod for controversy, sparking a counter-petition from progressive students and faculty demanding the disbandment of the TPUSA chapter itself. The counter-petition, described by TPUSA spokesman Andrew Kolvet as “an outrageous, slanderous document accusing TPUSA (not Antifa) of ‘promoting hate speech and inciting violence against our community,’” was signed by, among others, associate professor of religion Tia Kolbaba. Kolbaba has received mixed reviews from students, with some praising her teaching and others accusing her of hostility toward conservative viewpoints.
The situation escalated when Bray became the target of doxing—his home address was circulated online—and he and his family received death threats. Fearing for their safety, Bray and his partner, Professor Yesenia Barragan, left the United States for Europe, a move that was widely reported in the media. As Fox News and Breitbart News noted, this may be the first time in recent memory that a historian has fled the country due to threats connected to their academic work.
In response to the uproar, Rutgers University Chancellor Francine Conway issued a public statement on October 21, 2025, reaffirming the university’s stance on academic freedom and freedom of expression. “I write today to reaffirm Rutgers University’s unwavering commitment to academic freedom and freedom of expression—values that define a great research university and underpin our mission of discovery, dialogue, and public engagement,” Conway declared. She continued, “Incidents involving ‘doxing’ and harassment of faculty members understandably raise deep concerns across our community. I want to express my support for any member of our community who has been targeted for their scholarship.”
Conway’s statement was not merely rhetorical. She directed Rutgers’ chief of police and chief information technology officer to review protocols for both physical and digital safety on campus, signaling a desire to address the threats and harassment that had engulfed both faculty and students. “Free speech and academic freedom do not shield any of us from disagreement or critique,” Conway wrote. “At Rutgers, we encourage open and robust debate—even on the most controversial topics. Yet, the appropriate response to speech we oppose is more speech, not actions that seek to intimidate or threaten the personal safety of others.”
But not everyone at Rutgers was satisfied with the administration’s response. Megyn Doyle, a student and treasurer of the TPUSA chapter, voiced her frustration in an interview with Fox News, asserting, “If Rutgers truly aims to protect academic freedom, freedom of speech, and open debate, it must hold Mark Bray to that same standard.” Doyle and other TPUSA members claimed that after they were doxxed, the university focused its investigations on their chapter rather than on those responsible for the threats. As student Ava Kwan stated on Real America’s Voice, “They are doing nothing. The only thing that they’re doing is investigating our chapter.”
The controversy soon drew national attention, with outside observers weighing in on the implications for free speech and ideological diversity in academia. Professors from Columbia University and Barnard College penned an op-ed in the Columbia Spectator on October 21, 2025, expressing “profound dismay at the events involving historian Professor Mark Bray.” They wrote, “After he was targeted by the Rutgers chapter of Turning Point USA, Professor Bray and his family members received death threats, and his home address was circulated online. Afraid for his safety and that of his family, he and his partner, Professor Yesenia Barragan… left the United States with their children. To our knowledge, this is the first case in recent memory of a historian who has fled the country after receiving death threats on account of the history that they teach. It represents not just an attack on Professor Bray and his family on a personal level but also on academic freedom in general, and, as such, it has implications for all faculty, including those of us who teach at Barnard and Columbia.”
The dispute at Rutgers has played out against a backdrop of rising campus tensions. Since the Hamas attacks on October 7, 2025, the university has seen a surge in antisemitic sentiment, with anti-Israel propaganda and calls for boycotts appearing on campus. According to StopAntisemitism, Rutgers was “plastered with anti-Israel propaganda calling to boycott the world’s only Jewish state.” This has raised questions about whether the university is applying its standards of academic freedom and safety evenly to all student groups and faculty, or if selective enforcement is at play.
Mark Bray’s own history has only added fuel to the fire. In his book, Bray writes that violence is a “vital” part of Antifa activity. “In truth, violence represents a small though vital sliver of anti-fascist activity. Anti-fascists don’t wait for a fascist threat to become violent before acting to shut it down, physically if necessary,” he wrote, as cited by Breitbart News. In 2017, Bray announced that half of the proceeds from his book would directly fund Antifa protests. These details have been repeatedly cited by his critics as evidence of extremism, while his defenders argue that his scholarship is being unfairly targeted for political reasons.
The national political climate has also shaped the Rutgers debate. In September 2025, former President Donald Trump designated Antifa as a domestic terrorist organization, further polarizing opinions about Bray and those who support or oppose him. For many conservatives, Bray’s continued employment is seen as emblematic of what they perceive as left-wing bias and tolerance for radicalism in academia. Progressives, on the other hand, argue that the attacks on Bray constitute a broader assault on academic freedom and the right to dissent from mainstream political views.
As of late October 2025, Rutgers University remains embroiled in this ideological battle, with both sides accusing the other of hypocrisy and intolerance. The administration’s efforts to balance safety, free speech, and academic freedom have satisfied few, leaving the campus community—and the nation—grappling with questions that have no easy answers. The episode has exposed the deep fissures running through higher education, where debates over speech and safety are rarely abstract and often deeply personal.
For now, Rutgers stands as a microcosm of the larger national struggle over who gets to speak, who feels safe, and what academic freedom truly means in a polarized America.
