A new study finds college students largely oppose punishment for “objectionable speech,” except when they believe it is highly harmful. The research, published in Science Advances and conducted by teams including Stanford, Columbia, and the University of Pennsylvania, uses online survey experiments with just over 3,000 students. The findings also highlight group-targeting differences: students were more likely to support extra protections when speech is aimed at historically marginalized groups (a “particularism” view) than when they apply the same standards to all groups (“universalism”). The results are being framed as evidence of how campus speech disagreements can reflect competing normative commitments, offering colleges a data point as they refine policies in the aftermath of recent protest waves.