In the wake of the political assassination of Charlie Kirk, America has reached a pivot point. As Utah Governor Spencer Cox eloquently put it, we don’t yet know whether we’re at the end of a dark chapter in our history or at the beginning of a darker one. What we do now will tell the tale.

Well, there is something concrete we can do — not only to honor Charlie Kirk and carry on his legacy but also to shift America’s cultural momentum in the direction of civil dialogue and away from violence.

In 2023, Florida passed a law requiring every public university to organize debates and panel discussions on public policy controversies. All the events are to be recorded and posted on an easily accessible website. The Florida law is based on model legislation that I drafted and defended in 2019. That model bill is published and endorsed by the National Association of Scholars.

The good news is that the Florida debate law is in effect and working well. Earlier this year, the College Fix published a study confirming that. The Fix study also links to the various campus websites containing videos of the events. I haven’t had a chance to look thoroughly through every website and debate. My impression is that a significant number of debates are being held on “high-voltage” public controversies. But yes, there are also some debates and events on issues of lesser controversy. That’s fine, and even good, within reason.

By making all the events public and recording them, the Florida law prevents the flouting of legislative intent. The legislature can see the debates for itself and judge whether schools are attempting to skirt the law by avoiding controversial issues — or, say, by inviting moderate Democrats to debate hard-left Democrats while excluding conservative Republicans.

This is where conservative campus groups like Turning Point USA and Young America’s Foundation could play a very important, if informal, role in ensuring that legislative intent is followed. TPUSA chapters can keep track of all debates. They can also, along with other student groups, demand that debates be held on particular topics. If a public university in a given state is obviously flouting the intent of the law, TPUSA members could testify to that effect at the legislature when a university’s yearly appropriations are being voted on. Many legislators would take such testimony very seriously — particularly if backed up with evidence. In short, conservative campus groups can keep universities honest by ensuring that debates are held on the most important political controversies of the day.

As of now, however, only Florida has adopted a law based on the Campus Intellectual Diversity Act model. There should be one in every state. I’d also suggest that other states require a higher number of minimum debates than the Florida law requires. That might be workable if political momentum shifts in the direction of this proposal.

Charlie Kirk and Ben Shapiro have already shown the power that an extracurricular event can exercise on campus. There’s a reason why the campus left works so hard to silence conservative guest speakers. In part, shout-downs are a warning to conservative faculty and students. But shout-downs happen also because even a single, well-reasoned case for a suppressed point of view can puncture and deflate a campus orthodoxy. That’s why Kirk was such a powerful presence. Imagine what a whole raft of conservatives coming to campus to debate immigration, crime, abortion, affirmative action, global warming, etc. would do.

Not long after I published the model Campus Intellectual Diversity Act in 2019, the Arizona House passed such a bill. Unfortunately, that’s when the pandemic hit, and the Arizona Senate shut down. The idea had to wait until Florida picked it up, in 2023. It’s likely no coincidence that a campus debate bill first advanced in Arizona, home state of Charlie Kirk and Turning Point USA, a state long friendly to conservatives and to liberty.

In sum, we are in fact at a turning point. The campus free speech crisis that broke out in 2016 with the election of President Trump was never truly overcome. Despite all the publicity and concern, conservative speakers on campus are even rarer than they were a decade ago. It is anything but wrong to worry that things might go from very bad to worse.

Outdoor speaking events will likely soon become a rarity, and universities will use security costs as an excuse to discourage even indoor events that feature guest speakers, especially conservatives. The only way to avoid this is to require, by state law, debates on major public policy controversies. And, again, groups like Turning Point USA can play an important role in facilitating such campus debates.

To make this tragedy the end of a dark chapter in our history — rather than the beginning of an even darker one — every state in the union needs to pass a law inspired by the model Campus Intellectual Diversity Act. Or, perhaps, legislative sponsors can call their bill the Charlie Kirk Campus Intellectual Diversity Act.