@mtmind is relying at least partly on the Chicago Maroon, which is not the most accurate or informed source of information. Also, she might be making a logic error: just because Richard Spenser can be invited to speak, doesn’t mean that Geoff Stone or anyone else has to invite him.
The university has been clear about this issue. They brought together a faculty advisory committee in 2017 to develop protocols of behavior when speakers come to campus, so that people aren’t shouted down, blocked, threatened, or otherwise deprived of their freedom of expression. These and other recommendations have been codified in the administration’s disciplinary policies to help ensure that those who wish to invite unpopular speakers have the freedom do to so without harrassment. The university is one of the few institutions of higher ed to take the matter as seriously as it has, and it’s for this reason that it’s ranked #1 in terms of freedom of speech and academic freedom across the board. It’s the reason that the “Chicago Principles” are not named something else and the reason that other schools have adopted these and not some other document.
To repeat from above: the broad term “safe space” should not be confused with the university’s statement on the issue. UChicago is clear that its academic mission is not to be compromised by “safe space” thinking that shuts down speech. The Center of Identity and Inclusion is free to use whatever terminologies it wishes to in order to reach out to its target groups. And it does. That’s perfectly OK. What it can’t do is impose restrictions on speech, research, curricula, etc elsewhere in the university. Unlike other universities, UChicago has not weaponized the Center for Identity and Inclusion with investigative authority. There’s your difference.