This title is misleading - can it be corrected to the actual title of the article?

Because at issue isn't any ban on free speech, it's whether it's OK to ban invited speakers expected e.g. to incite harassment, bigotry, or violence. And obviously there's a grey area there, but it's certainly no restrain on the message at all - merely the platform (not that that's irrelevant, but the distinction isn't irrelevant either), and I kind of doubt you'd want to provide a platform to everything regardless of what kind of hate speech they're spouting. There's a fine line between a constructive diversity of opinions, including ones you don't agree with, and giving a microphone to those saying nothing new, where the primary draw isn't the message itself, but the drama and tribalism surrounding it.