The University of Minnesota, which President Trump’s Justice Department is scrutinizing for its handling of antisemitism on campus, largely barred itself on Friday from issuing official statements about “matters of public concern or public interest.”

The policy, in the works for months, was not a direct response to the Trump administration’s February announcement that it would investigate whether Minnesota and nine other universities had failed to protect Jewish students and faculty from discrimination.

But Friday’s vote by the board of regents nevertheless fit into the scramble by universities to undercut accusations that they have supported, or downplayed, antisemitic behavior or political activity.

Schools have come under fierce Republican criticism over their responses to protests over the war in Gaza. Campuses have seen bitter debates over defining antisemitism and the threshold for when political expression is intolerant or discriminatory, with university leaders often looking for a balance between allowing free speech and avoiding Washington’s potential ire.

Under Minnesota’s new policy, statements from the university — including ones from divisions like colleges and departments — about public issues will be forbidden unless the president determines the subject has “an actual or potential impact on the mission and operations of the university.”

The university senate, which includes students, faculty members and other workers, opposed the plan, and in early January, a university task force had urged a narrower approach. Critics have questioned whether the policy violates the First Amendment and argued that it grants excessive power to Minnesota’s president.

But during a raucous meeting on Friday in Minneapolis — the session went into recess twice because of protesters — regents voted, 9 to 3, to approve the policy.

“The university is not, and should not be, in the business of taking positions on these critical and controversial matters of public concern,” said Janie S. Mayeron, the board’s chair. “Individuals can do that. The university, its leaders and units should not.”

Another regent, Robyn J. Gulley, said she had received hundreds of messages ahead of Friday’s vote, with the feedback “largely” opposing the proposal.

“The First Amendment protects not only free speech, but the right to association,” Ms. Gulley said before she voted against the proposal. “There is probably nowhere in the world that that is more important than in universities, where it is not only the right but the obligation of students, faculty, staff to speak” about their areas of research and expertise.

The notion of “institutional neutrality” is not unique to Minnesota, where the new policy will cover five campuses, including the flagship in Minneapolis. Since the Hamas attack on Israel on Oct. 7, 2023, at least 140 colleges have adopted such policies, according to a report released Tuesday by the Heterodox Academy, a nonprofit that has been critical of progressivism on college campuses.

Before the attack, the report said, only eight schools had neutrality policies.

The last few weeks have put new pressure on Minnesota, with the university among the schools that Justice Department antisemitism investigators said they would visit to weigh “whether remedial action is warranted.”

The department has not detailed why Minnesota made its list. Although Richard W. Painter, a Minnesota law professor who was the White House’s top ethics lawyer for part of George W. Bush’s presidency, told the Department of Education in 2023 about possible antisemitism at the university, he has speculated that the Justice Department’s interest may carry a political motive.

Tim Walz, who was the Democratic nominee for vice president in last year’s election, is Minnesota’s governor, and the district of Representative Ilhan Omar, a Democrat who has been a steadfast critic of Mr. Trump and Israel, includes Minnesota’s main campus.

Minnesota said in a statement that it was “confident in our approach to combating hate and bias on our campus, and we will always fully cooperate with any review related to these topics.”

In addition to Minnesota, the Justice Department is examining Columbia University; George Washington University; Harvard University; Johns Hopkins University; New York University; Northwestern University; the University of California, Los Angeles; the University of California, Berkeley; and the University of Southern California.

But some misgivings about Minnesota, which contended with a protest encampment last spring, predate Mr. Trump’s return to power.

In December 2023, for example, Mr. Painter and a former regent, Michael D. Hsu, complained to the Department of Education that the College of Liberal Arts had allowed departments to use official websites for statements that were critical of Israel.

A website Mr. Hsu and Mr. Painter cited — featuring a statement by the gender, women and sexuality studies faculty — endorsed the boycott, divestment and sanctions movement and called for “dismantling Israel’s apartheid system.” (After the statement’s publication, a disclaimer was added to note that it did “not reflect the position of the University of Minnesota.”)

It was not clear how much Friday’s vote would ease Washington’s skepticism of Minnesota. Some other universities that recently embraced institutional neutrality still ended up under investigation by the Trump administration, including Harvard, Johns Hopkins, Northwestern and Southern California.

Stephanie Saul contributed reporting.