On March 4, 2026, the Catholic University of America’s Columbus School of Law hosted the 5th Annual Seigenthaler Debate, a cornerstone of its First Amendment initiatives. This year’s resolution, Anti-Doxxing Statutes are Unconstitutional Infringements upon the Free Speech Clause, sparked a lively and nuanced discussion between two prominent legal scholars. Following opening remarks and introductions by Professor A.G. Harmon, Associate Dean of Bench and Bar Programs at Catholic Law, the debate began, offering a dynamic exchange of ideas on the constitutional implications of the resolution.

David L. Hudson, Jr., a First Amendment expert from Belmont University, argued the pro position, emphasizing the dangers of overbroad laws that criminalize truthful speech. Opposing him, Ilya Shapiro of the Manhattan Institute contended that well-crafted anti-doxxing statutes can coexist with constitutional protections, addressing the weaponization of personal information without infringing on free speech. Moderated by Judge Peter Phipps of the Third Circuit Court of Appeals, the debate explored the tension between protecting individuals from harm and preserving the robust exchange of ideas.

Hudson highlighted the chilling effect such statutes could have on lawful expression, while Shapiro underscored the need to prevent the misuse of sensitive information to intimidate or endanger others. The discussion also delved into the role of mens rea, the balance between public and private concerns, and the evolving nature of First Amendment jurisprudence in the digital age.

A recording of the 2026 Seigenthaler Debate is available below for those who wish to explore this engaging discussion.