The Boston College Republicans denounced Nick Solheim’s remarks, emphasizing that the group does not endorse his rhetoric and that it is actively cooperating with the Office of Student Involvement (OSI) to resolve an investigation into the unapproved event.
“Mr. Solheim’s views and rhetoric were unprecedented and unrepresentative of the views of our club members, and we do not endorse any of these views,” the executive board of the BC Republicans wrote in a statement to The Heights. “We uphold the notion of civil discourse and believe that there is always a time for respectful discussion, even with those who do not agree with us.”
The executive board of the BC Republicans acknowledged that the event had not been properly registered with the University, describing it as a mistake rather than an intentional decision.
“This lapse in understanding was a procedural oversight and result of a sincere miscommunication while organizing our event,” the group wrote. “We are currently working with the Office of Student Involvement and the Office of the Dean of Students to resolve this matter.”
The BC Republicans hosted Democratic Congressman Jake Auchincloss (D-Mass.) at a private event Thursday night.
After the event, Auchincloss—a Marine veteran—cautioned against blurring the line between politics and warfare in response to Solheim’s comments urging conservative students to be prepared for a civil war.
“I’ve been to war, I’ve been to politics,” Auchincloss told The Heights. “People who conflate the two are generally bad at both.”
Auchincloss emphasized the necessity of in-person conversations amid online tension.
“There’s too much online outrage and not enough real-life conversation,” Auchincloss said.
In an Instagram post, the BC Republicans expressed appreciation for the chance to speak with Auchincloss and explore an overlap in viewpoints between Democrats and Republicans.
“We had an engaging conversation with the Congressman about key issues relevant to college students,” the BC Republicans wrote. “We appreciated the Congressman’s perspectives on these issues and enjoyed finding common ground.”
In an email to the student body, OSI confirmed that it was not informed of Solheim’s invitation to campus prior to the event. It also reiterated the importance of adhering to BC’s speaker policy, which encourages dialogue that promotes service to others and thoughtful conversations.
“The University enforces this policy as a result of its commitment to fostering respectful dialogue and ensuring that all student events align with our institutional values, policies, and community standards,” OSI wrote in the email.

Yuriy Bane • Oct 24, 2025 at 10:26 am
As someone who attended Solheim’s presentation, I can say with certainty that his remarks were clearly over the top, but also that BC Republicans should be commended for their swift disavowal of the inflammatory rhetoric used throughout his remarks.
However, it’s also worth recognizing that conservatives on college campuses already face immense scrutiny for hosting speakers who challenge the prevailing views of the ruling “intelligentsia.” The fact that this event has now turned into an “investigation” by the university shows just how easily procedural issues can be weaponized to dampen free expression.
Also, the ensuing investigation by the Office of Student Involvement risks reinforcing the perception that conservative organizations are held to a stricter standard than their progressive counterparts. This asymmetry—real or perceived—undermines the spirit of viewpoint diversity that higher education claims to champion.
True free discourse means letting students hear a full range of opinions—even controversial ones like Solheim’s—without fear of administrative backlash. Solheim’s tone was clearly inappropriate (nobody is contesting that), but the larger, more dangerous issue now is that the university administration is using an isolated incident like this to justify tighter control over political speech. The BC Republicans’ decision to host both a conservative influencer and a Democratic congressman shows a genuine commitment to open and respectful dialogue. If Boston College is serious about “respectful conversation,” it should recognize that open debate sometimes includes uncomfortable voices. I think universities best serve their educational mission when they allow students to engage directly with competing ideas, trusting them to exercise discernment rather than shielding them from controversy.
lol • Oct 24, 2025 at 11:42 am
“open debate sometimes includes uncomfortable voices.” Ya so that’s not what happened here.
Solheim literally said, “I want to start with a heavy exhortation—you need to be willing to be killed.” That IS NOT AN UNCOMFORTABLE VOICE, it is fear mongering in a manner that is to train young adults to become martyrs for a larger political agenda and see opposition as do/die.
There is not “open debate” that is happening here. I doubt any of you who attended the event had the courage or the wherewithal to actually oppose Solheim.
Stop trying to play the victim here, Yuriy, it’s insufferable. This is not a censorship or “double-standards” issue; this is an issue on extremism that rivals that of the Nazi-era propaganda that has NO place in an institution, especially the Jesuit Boston College.
What's Going On? • Oct 24, 2025 at 3:33 pm
Yuriy,
The club is being held accountable for the “killing” comments of the speaker. The club also didn’t go through proper channels of getting permission for the speaker. This isn’t about shutting down conservative thought. It’s about the university creating a tolerance boundary on campus. The speaker is an idiot who doesn’t understand how truth and history work, that we know his words, having heard them in movies, and documentaries, in the retelling of family histories, and in the copious amounts of written and photographic history, some of which BC’s library contains. Do not worry about conservative thought, suggest a topic of your own, and present it. If you get push back, learn from it. Usually a populace does not like ideas that limit people’s lives. Usually a populace likes ideas that expand people’s lives. Most people do not like to be part of whatever this speakers intent was – a viral moment perhaps?
Abi • Oct 24, 2025 at 8:15 am
Wasn’t the speaker event called “how to implement the MAGA agenda”… what sort of thoughtful conversation and intelligent rhetoric were BC Republicans expecting?