The Academic Bill of Rights (ABOR) is a policy document, proposed as a set of standards to protect intellectual diversity, academic freedom, viewpoint neutrality, and free speech on U.S. college campuses. It was drafted by conservative activist and writer David Horowitz in the winter of 2002 and promoted through his organization, the David Horowitz Freedom Center, specifically via its student advocacy branch, Students for Academic Freedom. The ABOR emphasizes principles such as pluralism, critical intelligence, openness, and fairness, aiming to protect students and faculty from ideological bias or political indoctrination in teaching, hiring, and curriculum development. It argues that universities should foster a multiplicity of viewpoints and avoid favoring any political or ideological orthodoxy, positioning itself as a defense against perceived liberal dominance in academia.

The document is structured around key rights, including the freedom to teach and learn without disruption by political agendas, the appointment of diverse faculty based on intellectual competence rather than partisan views, and the encouragement of balanced exposure to conflicting scholarly perspectives in coursework. Structurally, it consists of three parts: a preamble defining academic freedom, a list of student rights including exposure to diverse viewpoints and protection from political indoctrination, and faculty rights focused on merit-based evaluation and scholarly integrity.

Horowitz intended the ABOR to serve as a non-binding guideline for universities to adopt voluntarily, though it has inspired legislative campaigns in over 20 states to enact it as law or policy. It was introduced in over 20 state legislatures between 2004 and 2009, with Pennsylvania's House passing a resolution in 2005 (though it stalled in the Senate). Proponents, including conservative groups, hail it as essential for restoring academic integrity and countering 'indoctrination' in classrooms.

Despite its goals, the ABOR has drawn widespread criticism from academic bodies like the American Association of University Professors (AAUP) and scholars across ideological spectrums, who contend it infringes on institutional autonomy and academic freedom by imposing external conservative standards. Critics describe it as a vehicle for advancing a right-wing agenda, potentially leading to censorship of progressive ideas or quotas for ideological balance. The AAUP issued statements in 2003 and 2006 rejecting its premises, and critics accuse it of fostering a chilling effect on progressive scholarship and being a stalking horse for right-wing interference in universities.

While no state has fully legislated the ABOR, it has influenced campus policies and debates on free speech, with ongoing controversies highlighting tensions between intellectual diversity and traditional academic governance. No major legal challenges directly targeting the ABOR as a document are documented, but its promotion has sparked controversies in academic governance and legislative hearings.