Controversial questions have the potential to awaken strong feelings for students and are common in the civics education. Despite this, research shows that students are not presented with sufficient opportunities to encounter controversial questions. The present study, through semi-structured interviews, examines ten upper secondary school students regarding their experiences with controversial questions. This study aims to contribute knowledge surrounding the experiences of upper secondary school students regarding controversial questions in the civics subject and civics education. The results of this study indicate that topics such as war and gang crime in the civics subject are perceived as controversially loaded based on the students’ classroom situation, as well as the background, opinions, and experiences that the students possess. Furthermore, the results show that some students perceive that they are given certain opportunities to discuss controversial questions, which refutes previous research. At the same time, to a larger extent, the results signify potential limitations regarding students' opportunities to discuss controversial questions in civics education. This is expressed through the students who imply that controversial questions are not presented in certain cases due to the teacher’s approach, the student’s willingness to dare to discuss, but also through the teaching methods that are used. Additionally, multiple students express that their opportunities for sharing opinions regarding controversial questions should be overseen. This is connected to the study’s theoretical framework, the associative agonism by pointing to the necessity of exchanging opinions between students in an open and democratic environment of discourse.