Assembly Bill 501
Free speech and academic freedom at University of Wisconsin System institutions and technical colleges, due process in disciplinary proceedings at University of Wisconsin System institutions and technical colleges, and causes of action against the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System and technical college district boards. (FE)
Topics: Court: Procedure, Freedom of speech and press, Technical college, University of Wisconsin, University of Wisconsin: Student life
Stopped before the full Assembly voted
The recommended passing it, but the full Assembly never voted on it. The last day for votes this session was Mar 19, 2026. To try again, a lawmaker would have to start a new bill.
-
Introduced, passed
Oct 9, 2025
-
Committee, passed
Approved
-
Assembly vote, stopped here
Stopped here. The full Assembly never voted on it.
-
Senate vote, not reached
-
Governor, not reached
-
Law, not reached
Latest entry in the official record, Mar 23, 2026: “Failed to pass pursuant to ”
Following saves it on this device. New actions show on your Following page. You can also get updates in a feed reader.
Embed this on your site
Paste this code into your page. The card shows the latest record each time it loads. Preview the card
The same bill was also filed in the Senate as SB 498. That version was vetoed.
Terms on this page
Committee
A small group of lawmakers that looks at a bill first. Most bills never leave committee.
Senate Joint Resolution 1
The session's calendar. Any bill not passed by its last voting day dies.
Official term: Failed to pass pursuant to SJR 1. More in the glossary
Legislative Reference Bureau
The Legislature's nonpartisan office that drafts bills and writes the summary at the top of each one.
Official term: LRB analysis. More in the glossary
Author
A lawmaker who formally puts a bill forward. The text itself is drafted by the Legislative Reference Bureau.
Official term: Author, coauthor. More in the glossary
Signed on in support
Lawmakers who back a bill without being one of its authors, often from the other chamber.
Official term: Cosponsor. More in the glossary
Cost estimate
A state agency's estimate of what a bill would cost or save.
Official term: Fiscal estimate. More in the glossary
Roll call
A vote where each lawmaker's yes or no is recorded by name.
Official term: Roll call vote. More in the glossary
What it would have done
Summary by the , the Legislature's nonpartisan drafting office. It's their wording, not ours.
This bill establishes certain standards related to free speech and academic freedom at University of Wisconsin System institutions and technical colleges. For violation of these standards, the Board of Regents of the UW System or technical college district board may be subject to a civil cause of action and must provide certain public notice of the violation. The bill also establishes certain due process standards in disciplinary proceedings at UW System institutions and technical colleges.
free speech and academic freedom First Amendment protections Under the bill, a UW institution or technical college may not do any of the following: 1) restrict speech protected under the First Amendment, if the speaker’s conduct is not unlawful and does not materially and substantially disrupt the functioning of the UW institution or technical college; 2) maintain and enforce time, place, and manner restrictions on expressive activities on the publicly accessible, open outdoor areas of its campus and indoor areas and virtual spaces that have been designated as public forums, except classrooms while they are in use for instructional purposes, unless those restrictions meet specified requirements; 3) designate any area of a campus a “free speech zone” or otherwise create policies restricting noncommercial expressive activities to a particular area of a campus; 4) subject to an exception, require a permit as a condition of being allowed to engage in expressive activities protected under the bill; 5) charge security fees, as part of a permit application, based on the content of expression or anticipated reaction; or 6) sanction individuals or groups for discriminatory harassment unless the speech targets its victim on the basis of a protected class under law, and is so severe, pervasive, and objectively offensive that it effectively bars a student from receiving equal access to educational opportunities or benefits. Under the bill, if a permit is required, the permitting process and any security fee must be content and viewpoint neutral. The bill defines a “virtual space” as an electronic forum that enables participants not in each other’s physical presence to communicate with each other in real time and that is controlled or supervised by, or used for an authorized purpose or activity of, a UW institution or technical college, not including a virtual classroom.
Read the full summary Show less
The bill also specifies that all of an institution’s or technical college’s indoor areas and virtual spaces that have been designated as public forums and publicly accessible outdoor areas, except classrooms while they are in use for instructional purposes, are governed by rules applicable to traditional public forums. The bill specifies that its provisions do not 1) enable individuals to engage in conduct that intentionally, materially, and substantially disrupts another’s expressive activity in a campus space reserved for that activity; or 2) limit the right of student expression at campus locations not specified in the bill.
The bill requires an institution or technical college to do all of the following: 1) conduct a survey biennially of students and employees on First Amendment rights, academic freedom, perceived political or other bias at the institution or technical college, and whether campus culture promotes self-censorship; 2) submit a report biennially to the legislature detailing the results of this survey; and 3) annually provide all students and employees with instruction in academic freedom, due process, and First Amendment protections.
Academic freedom Under the bill, a UW or technical college policy or employee may not limit the expressive rights and academic freedom of an instructor to 1) conduct research, publish, lecture, or teach in the academic setting; 2) require students to participate in instructional exercises with legitimate pedagogical purposes that involve exploring, or arguing for or against, any argument or assertion; or 3) speak publicly as a private citizen on matters of public concern.
Principles The bill sets forth principles of academic freedom and freedom of expression to which the UW System and each institution must adhere, as well as UW System and institution responsibilities associated with these principles.
Notice and cause of action The bill requires a UW institution or technical college that is found by a state or federal court, by a preponderance of the evidence, to have violated any of the free speech or academic freedom provisions described above to include, for four years, the following disclaimer on all notices to individuals regarding admission to the UW institution or technical college: “NOTICE: We are required by the State of Wisconsin to inform you that within the last four years ... [insert name of UW institution or technical college] has violated the free speech or academic freedom provisions in the Wisconsin statutes.” Under the bill, the attorney general, a district attorney, or any person whose expressive rights were violated may bring a court action against the Board of Regents of the UW System or the technical college district board for violation by a UW institution or technical college of any of the free speech or academic freedom provisions described above and may seek an injunction and recovery of damages, court costs, and attorney fees for persons aggrieved by the violation. In such an action, if the court finds a violation, the court must award to the plaintiffs all of the following: 1) total damages for all prevailing persons aggrieved by the violation of not less than $500 for the initial violation plus $50 for each day after the complaint is served that the violation remains ongoing, but not exceeding an aggregate amount of $100,000 for all cases stemming from a single controversy; and 2) court costs and reasonable attorney fees. An award to the plaintiffs of damages, court costs, or attorney fees must be paid from the UW institution’s or technical college’s administrative expense moneys.
due process in disciplinary proceedings Due process guarantees Under the bill, a student enrolled in a UW institution or technical college has a property interest in maintaining the student’s status as a student that may be terminated against the student’s will only for due cause, including failure to meet academic standards or attendance requirements, failure to pay tuition or other fees, or violating conduct rules. A student accused of a disciplinary or conduct violation that carries a potential penalty of expulsion or suspension of more than nine days, and a UW institution’s or technical college’s employee accused of a disciplinary or conduct violation, have the right to be represented, at the person’s own expense, by a licensed attorney or non-attorney advocate who is permitted to fully participate during the disciplinary proceeding. The same right applies to a student organization, employee organization, or independent organization recognized by the UW institution or technical college (organization) accused of a violation and to a complaining student if the disciplinary proceeding arises from the student’s complaint. Prior to initiating a disciplinary proceeding or investigation, a UW institution or technical college must notify the student, employee, or organization that a complaint has been made and inform the student, employee, or organization of the student’s, employee’s, or organization’s due process rights. A UW institution or technical college must ensure that all parties to a disciplinary proceeding, including if applicable an accusing student, have access to all material evidence, including both inculpatory and exculpatory evidence, not later than one week prior to the start of any formal hearing or similar adjudicatory proceeding. Before a disciplinary proceeding is scheduled, and at least two business days before a student, employee, or organization may be questioned about allegations of violations of the institution’s or technical college’s disciplinary or conduct rules, the institution or technical college must advise the student, employee, or organization in writing of these rights. A UW institution or technical college is not obligated to follow the state’s rules of evidence in a disciplinary proceeding, but must make a good faith effort to include only relevant, probative evidence and must exclude evidence that is neither relevant nor probative. A UW institution or technical college must ensure that a disciplinary proceeding is carried out free from conflicts of interest by prohibiting overlap of administrative or adjudicative roles.
Under this bill, if a UW institution or technical college violates any of these due process provisions more than once in a five-year period, it must freeze tuition for all students for the following two academic years. For a UW institution, the Board of Regents of the UW System must also ensure that the institution’s allocation of funding is reduced commensurate with the tuition freeze.
Who's behind it
28 representatives are its . All 28 are Republicans.
4 more lawmakers .
See all 32 names Hide the names
Authors (28)
- Scott Allen · Republican, Assembly
- Dave Armstrong · Republican, Assembly
- Elijah Behnke · Republican, Assembly
- Lindee Brill · Republican, Assembly
- Alex Dallman · Republican, Assembly
- Barbara Dittrich · Republican, Assembly
- Bob Donovan · Republican, Assembly
- Cindi Duchow · Republican, Assembly
- Rick Gundrum · Republican, Assembly
- Gus Gustafson · Republican, Assembly
- Dan Knodl · Republican, Assembly
- Rob Kreibich · Republican, Assembly
- Scott Krug · Republican, Assembly
- Dave Maxey · Republican, Assembly
- Paul Melotik · Republican, Assembly
- Clint Moses · Republican, Assembly
- Dave Murphy · Republican, Assembly
- Jeff Mursau · Republican, Assembly
- Amanda Nedweski · Republican, Assembly
- Jerry O'Connor · Republican, Assembly
- Will Penterman · Republican, Assembly
- Jim Piwowarczyk · Republican, Assembly
- Shae Sortwell · Republican, Assembly
- David Steffen · Republican, Assembly
- Rob Summerfield · Republican, Assembly
- Rob Swearingen · Republican, Assembly
- Ron Tusler · Republican, Assembly
- Chuck Wichgers · Republican, Assembly
Signed on in support (4)
- Rachael Cabral-Guevara · Republican, Senate
- Chris Kapenga · Republican, Senate
- Cory Tomczyk · Republican, Senate
- Van Wanggaard · Republican, Senate
What it would cost
State agencies filed a . Each opens as a PDF from the Legislature.
How lawmakers voted
There was one vote on this bill.
Assembly Committee on Colleges and Universities vote to recommend it
Passed, 7 to 4 · Dec 17, 2025
No member-by-member record exists for this vote. Committee votes and some older sessions record totals only.
Official motion: “Report passage recommended by Committee on Colleges and Universities, Ayes 7, Noes 4”. Official record · This vote on its own page
What happened
-
Mar 23, 2026
The session ended, and the bill died with it.
-
Dec 17, 2025
Sent to the Assembly Committee on Rules.
-
Dec 17, 2025
The committee voted to recommend passing it, 7 to 4.
-
Nov 13, 2025
The committee held a public hearing.
-
Nov 3, 2025
A state agency sent in its estimate of the cost.
-
Oct 22, 2025
A state agency sent in its estimate of the cost.
-
Oct 9, 2025
Sent to the Assembly Committee on Colleges and Universities.
-
Oct 9, 2025
Introduced in the Assembly.
See the official record, word for word Hide the official record
- Oct 9, 2025 · Assembly
Introduced by Representatives Nedweski, Murphy, Gustafson, Allen, Armstrong, Behnke, Brill, Dallman, Dittrich, Donovan, Duchow, Gundrum, Knodl, Kreibich, Krug, Maxey, Melotik, Moses, Mursau, O'Connor, Penterman, Piwowarczyk, Sortwell, Steffen, Summerfield, Swearingen, Tusler and Wichgers; cosponsored by Senators Cabral-Guevara, Kapenga, Tomczyk and Wanggaard
- Oct 9, 2025 · Assembly
Read first time and referred to Committee on Colleges and Universities
- Oct 22, 2025 · Assembly
Fiscal estimate received
- Nov 3, 2025 · Assembly
Fiscal estimate received
- Nov 13, 2025 · Assembly
Public hearing held
- Dec 10, 2025 · Assembly
Executive action taken
- Dec 17, 2025 · Assembly
Report passage recommended by Committee on Colleges and Universities, Ayes 7, Noes 4
- Dec 17, 2025 · Assembly
Referred to committee on Rules
- Feb 10, 2026 · Assembly
Placed on calendar 2-12-2026 by Committee on Rules
- Feb 12, 2026 · Assembly
Laid on the table
- Mar 23, 2026 · Assembly
Failed to pass pursuant to Senate Joint Resolution 1
Terms on this page
Committee
A small group of lawmakers that looks at a bill first. Most bills never leave committee.
Senate Joint Resolution 1
The session's calendar. Any bill not passed by its last voting day dies.
Official term: Failed to pass pursuant to SJR 1. More in the glossary
Legislative Reference Bureau
The Legislature's nonpartisan office that drafts bills and writes the summary at the top of each one.
Official term: LRB analysis. More in the glossary
Author
A lawmaker who formally puts a bill forward. The text itself is drafted by the Legislative Reference Bureau.
Official term: Author, coauthor. More in the glossary
Signed on in support
Lawmakers who back a bill without being one of its authors, often from the other chamber.
Official term: Cosponsor. More in the glossary
Cost estimate
A state agency's estimate of what a bill would cost or save.
Official term: Fiscal estimate. More in the glossary
Roll call
A vote where each lawmaker's yes or no is recorded by name.
Official term: Roll call vote. More in the glossary
From the Wisconsin Legislature's official record, checked Sep 15, 2026. See the source
Committee
A small group of lawmakers that looks at a bill first. Most bills never leave committee.
Senate Joint Resolution 1
The session's calendar. Any bill not passed by its last voting day dies.
Official term: Failed to pass pursuant to SJR 1
Legislative Reference Bureau
The Legislature's nonpartisan office that drafts bills and writes the summary at the top of each one.
Official term: LRB analysis
Signed on in support
Lawmakers who back a bill without being one of its authors, often from the other chamber.
Official term: Cosponsor
Cost estimate
A state agency's estimate of what a bill would cost or save.
Official term: Fiscal estimate
Roll call
A vote where each lawmaker's yes or no is recorded by name.
Official term: Roll call vote