The Palestine exception to academic freedom and freedom of expression has been widely documented (e.g., Abdo, 2023;Fúnes–Flores, 2024; Jackson et al., 2016; Nadeau & Sears, 2010; Nestel, 2023; Nestel & Gaudet, 2022). This paper does not seek to analyze the innumerable examples of such since October 7, 2023. Rather, it asks: to what extent does language policy as a field provide us with analytics to contend with the unspeakability of Palestinian life? Despite many robust theories of language policy (e.g., language management [Spolsky, 2009]; linguistic culture [Schiffman, 1996]; normative language policy [Oakes & Peled, 2017]; linguistic governmentality [Martín–Rojo, 2018]; comparative-historical analysis [Wiley, 1999]; relational accountability and self-determination [McCarty et al., 2022], etc.), this paper argues that language-policy scholarship has addressed Palestine largely in historical (i.e., pre-1948) terms, when it considers Palestine at all. In response, the paper explores the potential of these concepts, drawing on my experiences of the Palestine exception in my teaching; in debates in my faculty association over what it can(not) say about Palestine; and in legal deliberations over an injunction against the encampment for Palestine at the University of Toronto last spring. The aim of the paper is to demonstrate how language-policy theory can open new opportunities to speak and enact solidarity.