Tag: forced

  • LSU’s First Black Law Dean Alleges Discrimination in Forced Departure

    LSU’s First Black Law Dean Alleges Discrimination in Forced Departure

    Alena AllenAlena Allen, who broke barriers in 2023 as the first Black person and woman to serve as dean of Louisiana State University’s Paul M. Hebert Law Center, will step down from her leadership role against her wishes, citing racial and gender discrimination.

    LSU announced Allen’s departure in an internal email dated August 29, stating she would transition to a full-time faculty position at the Baton Rouge institution. However, Allen maintains she did not voluntarily resign and may pursue legal action for alleged whistleblower retaliation.

    The controversy began when Allen raised concerns about financial “irregularities” she discovered in the law school’s budget—problems that predated her appointment. When she attempted to address these gaps and implement reforms, Allen alleges LSU leadership unfairly blamed her for the pre-existing issues.

    “I am the first woman and the first person of color to serve as the permanent dean of the Paul M. Hebert Law Center. That fact is not incidental—it is central to what follows,” Allen wrote in her response to auditors. “I find it deeply troubling, and frankly difficult to ignore, that I appear to be held to a standard far more exacting than that applied to my white, overwhelmingly male predecessors.”

    Allen’s attorney claims the LSU Board of Supervisors “engaged in systematic discrimination and retaliatory conduct” against her, arguing that her predecessors had “oversaw and entrenched the very practices” she questioned and began reforming.

    Allen’s forced departure adds to a concerning pattern of Black leadership exits at LSU. The university recently lost its first Black president, Dr. William Tate, who left on June 30 to become president of Rutgers University. Several other Black administrators have also announced departures from the institution.

    After Allen requested an investigation into the alleged racial and gender discrimination, university leaders informed her during a meeting that the law school would move in a “different direction” without her leadership.

    Allen will continue serving as dean through the end of the spring 2026 semester while LSU conducts a national search for her replacement. Interim LSU Provost Dr. Troy Blanchard is overseeing the search process.

     

    Source link

  • How Trump Forced Cuts at Wealthy Universities

    How Trump Forced Cuts at Wealthy Universities

    Six months into his second term, President Donald Trump has forced changes at many of the nation’s wealthiest universities, some of which have shed hundreds of jobs amid federal funding issues and investigations.

    While sector layoffs are so frequent that Inside Higher Ed has dedicated monthly coverage to rounding up such reductions, those actions are more common at small, cash-strapped colleges or state institutions reeling from budget cuts. But universities with multibillion-dollar endowments have been among those making the deepest cuts in the first half of 2025, often driven by freezes on federal funding that the Trump administration imposed with minimal notice.

    Some universities have also cited the recently passed endowment tax increase as a factor in layoffs.

    Altogether the layoffs show a sector bracing for a new reality where research funding can be suddenly yanked away with little to no explanation and international and graduate student enrollment, once considered a cash cow, is under threat—prompting institutions in even the highest financial stratosphere to cut costs as they navigate changing policies and a president sharply critical of the sector.

    Here’s a look at how the nation’s wealthiest universities are adjusting staffing levels due to an uncertain federal policy environment, research funding issues and a flurry of legal actions from the Trump administration that have forced concessions from multiple well-resourced institutions.

    Thousands Out at Johns Hopkins

    The Trump administration’s cuts to the U.S. Agency for International Development hit Johns Hopkins University with $800 million in canceled funding, prompting the Baltimore-based institution to shut down numerous international programs and lay off 2,222 employees earlier this year.

    The 2,222 job cuts are the deepest announced at any institution this year.

    The layoffs, announced in March, span more than 40 countries. Of the jobs cut, 1,975 were located internationally, while another 247 were in the U.S., with the majority in Baltimore. JHU announced at the time that another 107 employees would be furloughed.

    Johns Hopkins has an endowment recently valued at more than $13 billion.

    Hundreds of Buyouts at Duke

    Duke University, which has an endowment recently valued at nearly $12 billion, made some of the deepest cuts of the year so far when officials announced in July that 599 employees had accepted buyouts. Another 250 faculty members are reportedly weighing buyout offers as well.

    Following the first round of buyouts, university officials said layoffs will begin this month.

    Duke officials announced the buyouts before the Trump administration froze $108 million in federal grants and contracts and opened investigations into alleged racial discrimination, accusing the university of emphasizing diversity over merit in hiring, admissions and other practices.

    Deep Cuts at Northwestern

    Earlier this year, the Trump administration abruptly froze $790 million in research funding for Northwestern University, reportedly with no explanation. That action occurred at about the same time that the federal government opened an investigation into alleged antisemitism on campus.

    Northwestern, which has an endowment valued at more than $14 billion, responded by eliminating 425 jobs last month in an effort to shave 5 percent off of its staff budget. The move was preceded by a hiring freeze and other cost-cutting measures announced earlier this year.

    President Michael Schill and other administrators wrote in a message to campus that the cuts were “in response to more than just the federal research funding freeze.” They also pointed to “rapidly rising healthcare expenses, litigation, labor contracts, employee benefits, compliance requirements and a suite of federal changes” that may harm international student enrollment.

    The Ax Falls at Stanford

    Stanford University plans to cut 363 jobs beginning this fall as part of an effort to shave $140 million off the general funds budget due to financial issues connected to federal policy changes.

    Those cuts come after the university announced a hiring freeze in February.

    Stanford has the fourth-largest endowment among U.S. universities, recently valued at $37.6 billion. But despite its deep pockets, the private research university is feeling the squeeze from the Trump administration, with officials writing in a state regulatory filing that the university anticipates “reductions in federal research funding” and an increase in endowment taxes.

    Additionally, the U.S. Department of Justice launched an investigation into admissions practices at Stanford earlier this year, accusing the university of sidestepping a ban on affirmative action.

    Nearly 180 Layoffs at Columbia

    Few institutions have faced as much scrutiny from the federal government in recent years as Columbia University, which agreed to sweeping changes and yielded to demands from the Trump administration to overhaul admissions, disciplinary processes and academic programs. The university will also share admissions data and reduce the number of international students it accepts in an unprecedented agreement with the Trump administration that culminated in a $221 million settlement over allegations of antisemitism tied to pro-Palestinian campus protests.

    Although the Trump administration will release some frozen research funds as a condition of the settlement, choking off federal dollars has already prompted cuts. Columbia announced in May that the university had laid off nearly 180 researchers amid its standoff with the federal government.

    Columbia’s endowment was recently valued at $14.7 billion.

    ‘A Day of Loss’ at Boston U

    Boston University announced plans last month to lay off 120 workers and eliminate another 120 vacant jobs.

    Officials wrote in a letter to campus that “recent and ongoing federal actions and funding cuts are affecting our research enterprise as well as day-to-day operations” and creating “uncertainty” as BU grapples with inflation, declining graduate enrollment and other challenges.

    “This is a day of loss for all of us,” officials wrote. “There is no way around this. We know our community may need time to adjust to these difficult changes. Yet, it is also a necessary step in ensuring our future.”

    BU’s endowment is valued at more than $3 billion.

    Dozens Laid Off at USC

    The University of Southern California cut 55 jobs last month, according to a state regulatory filing.

    Officials announced in mid-July that layoffs were underway, though they did not specify the number of employees affected. USC also implemented a hiring freeze, halted merit-based pay raises, ended some vendor contracts and pulled back on discretionary spending and travel.

    Interim president Beong-Soo Kim called the layoffs “painful” in a message to campus. He cited various financial concerns, including “significant shifts in federal support for our research, hospitals, and student financial aid” as well as potential declines in international enrollment.

    “The ultimate impact of these changes is difficult to predict, but for a university of our scale, the potential annual revenue loss in federally sponsored research funding alone could be $300 million or more,” Kim wrote, adding these changes came on top of a pre-existing budget deficit.

    USC’s endowment was recently valued at $8.1 billion.

    Unspecified Cuts at Harvard

    Harvard University, which is currently locked in a legal battle with the Trump administration over alleged antisemitism and other accusations, has also laid off employees this year. Harvard Magazine reports that multiple schools have reduced staff as a result of having federal research funds frozen.

    However, Harvard has not released numbers and declined to provide an estimate to Inside Higher Ed. Union officials have said that layoffs could add up to hundreds of workers.

    Harvard is the nation’s wealthiest university, with an endowment valued at nearly $52 billion.

    Likely Layoffs at Brown

    Following Columbia, Brown University struck a deal with the Trump administration last month, agreeing to certain changes in order to restore around $510 million in frozen research funding.

    The federal government closed investigations into alleged antisemitism as part of the settlement. Brown also agreed to put $50 million over the course of a decade into workforce development in Rhode Island. Less than a week after the settlement, Brown officials announced that “some layoffs will be necessary” due to the “persisting financial impact of federal actions.”

    Brown also enacted a hiring freeze in March, and nearly 350 jobs remain unfilled.

    University officials wrote that they expected a $30 million hit to the 2026 fiscal year budget from the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, Trump’s far-reaching legislation that affected the sector in various ways, including increases to endowment taxes and limiting or eliminating some loan programs.

    Brown’s endowment was recently valued at $7.2 billion, the lowest among its Ivy League peers.

    Source link

  • VICTORY: Mississippi town votes to drop lawsuit that had forced newspaper to take down editorial

    VICTORY: Mississippi town votes to drop lawsuit that had forced newspaper to take down editorial

    CLARKSDALE, Miss., Feb. 25, 2025 — After receiving widespread condemnation for obtaining a temporary restraining order that forced Mississippi’s Clarksdale Press Register to take down an editorial critical of the city, Clarksdale’s Board of Mayor and Commissioners voted Monday to drop the lawsuit.

    Last week, the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression first called national attention to the plight of the Press Register after the city sued the small-town Coahoma County newspaper to force it to take down an editorial criticizing local officials. On Friday, FIRE agreed to defend the Press Register, its editor, and parent company in court to have the unconstitutional restraining order lifted.

    “The implications of this case go beyond one Mississippi town censoring its paper of record,” said FIRE attorney David Rubin. “If the government can get a court order silencing mere questions about its decisions, the First Amendment rights of all Americans are in jeopardy.”

    By Monday, Clarksdale’s Board had convened, voted not to continue with the lawsuit, and filed a notice of voluntary dismissal with the court. That means the city’s suit is over and with it the restraining order preventing the Press Register from publishing its editorial.  

    “While we are relieved the city has voted to drop its vindictive lawsuit, it doesn’t unring this bell,” Rubin said. “The Press Register is exploring its options to ensure that the city refrains from blatantly unconstitutional censorship in the future.” 

    The controversy began when the city of Clarksdale held an impromptu meeting on Feb. 4 to discuss sending a resolution asking the state legislature to let it levy a 2% tax on products like tobacco, alcohol, and marijuana. By state law, cities must notify the media when they hold such irregular “special-called meetings,” but the Press Register did not receive any notice. 

    In response, the Press Register blasted the city in an editorial titled “Secrecy, Deception Erode Public Trust,” and questioned their motive for freezing out the press. “Have commissioners or the mayor gotten kick-back from the community?” the editorial asked. “Until Tuesday we had not heard of any. Maybe they just want a few nights in Jackson to lobby for this idea – at public expense.”

    “For over a hundred years, the Press Register has served the people of Clarksdale by speaking the truth and printing the facts,” said Wyatt Emmerich, president of Emmerich Newspapers. “We didn’t earn the community’s trust by backing down to politicians, and we didn’t plan on starting now.”

    Rather than taking their licks, the Clarksdale Board of Commissioners made a shocking move by voting to sue the Press Register, its editor and publisher Floyd Ingram, and its parent company Emmerich Newspapers for “libel.” Last Tuesday, Judge Martin granted ex parte – that is, without hearing from the Press Register – the city’s motion for a temporary restraining order to force it to take down the editorial.

    By silencing the Press Register before they could even challenge Clarksdale’s claims, Judge Martin’s ruling represented a clear example of a “prior restraint,” a serious First Amendment violation. Before the government can force the removal of any speech, the First Amendment rightly demands a determination whether it fits into one of the limited categories of unprotected speech or otherwise withstands judicial scrutiny. Otherwise, the government has carte blanche to silence speech in the days, months, or even years it takes to get a final ruling that the speech was actually protected.

    Judge Martin’s decision was even more surprising given that Clarksdale’s lawsuit had several obvious and fatal flaws. Most glaringly, the government itself cannot sue citizens for libel. As the Supreme Court reaffirmed in the landmark 1964 case New York Times v. Sullivan, “no court of last resort in this country has ever held, or even suggested, that prosecutions for libel on government have any place in the American system of jurisprudence.”

    But even if the Clarksdale commissioners had sued in their personal capacities, Sullivan also established that public officials have to prove not just that a newspaper made an error, but that it did so with “actual malice,” defined as “knowledge that it was false or with reckless disregard of whether it was false.” Clarksdale’s lawsuit didn’t even attempt to prove the Press Register editorial met that standard.

    Finally, libel requires a false statement of fact. But the Press Register’s broadside against city officials was an opinion piece that expressed the opinion that there could be unsavory reasons for the city’s lack of candor. The only unique statement of fact expressed in the editorial — that Clarksdale failed to meet the legal obligation to inform the media of its meeting — was confirmed by the city itself in its legal filings.

    “If asking whether a politician might be corrupt was libel, virtually every American would be bankrupt,” said FIRE attorney Josh Bleisch. “For good reason, courts have long held that political speech about government officials deserves the widest latitude and the strongest protection under the First Amendment. That’s true from the White House all the way down to your local councilman.”

    Like many clumsy censorship attempts, Clarksdale’s lawsuit against the Press Register backfired spectacularly by outraging the public and making the editorial go viral. After FIRE’s advocacy, the small Mississippi town’s lawsuit received coverage from the New York Times, The Washington Post, Fox News, and CNN, and condemnation from national organizations like Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press and the Committee to Protect Journalists. Other Mississippi newspapers have stepped up and published the editorial in their own pages to ensure its preservation.

    “If the board had grumbled and gone about their day, this whole brouhaha wouldn’t have traveled far outside our town,” said Emmerich. “But when they tried to censor us, the eyes of the nation were on Clarksdale and millions heard about our editorial. Let this be a lesson: if you try to silence one voice in America, a hundred more will take up the call.”

    The Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE) is a nonpartisan, nonprofit organization dedicated to defending and sustaining the individual rights of all Americans to free speech and free thought — the most essential qualities of liberty. FIRE educates Americans about the importance of these inalienable rights, promotes a culture of respect for these rights, and provides the means to preserve them.

    CONTACT:

    Alex Griswold, Communications Campaign Manager, FIRE: 215-717-3473; [email protected]

    Source link