Tag: Group

Belfast hip-hop group Kneecap at the center of international firestorm
Last year, FIRE launched the Free Speech Dispatch, a regular series covering new and continuing censorship trends and challenges around the world. Our goal is to help readers better understand the global context of free expression. Want to make sure you don’t miss an update? Sign up for our newsletter.

Kneecap spurs controversy in the U.S. and investigation in the UK as narcocorridos controversy roils Mexico

Belfast trio Kneecap’s public statements at Coachella and earlier concerts have caused an international stir, and now even the UK’s counter-terrorism police are involved.

The band, already no stranger to controversy, provoked it once again during its Coachella performances by displaying the message, “Israel is committing genocide … enabled by the US,” adding, “Fuck Israel. Free Palestine.”

In the following days, they were uninvited from music festivals in Germany as well as split with their booking agency in the U.S., meaning that the band is likely to face work-visa issues in its upcoming American tour. (And, given the Trump administration’s current track record on the subject, it would not be surprising to see them face visa challenges on the basis of their expression.)

In addition to the Coachella dustup, the group’s past comments have stirred new threats of legal action in the UK, specifically an “Up Hamas, up Hezbollah” chant at a 2024 gig and a band member’s comment at a show the year prior: “The only good Tory is a dead Tory. Kill your local MP.”

Metropolitan police said videos of both comments “were referred to the Counter Terrorism Internet Referral Unit for assessment by specialist officers, who have determined there are grounds for further investigation into potential offences linked to both videos.” A UK government spokesperson also said that authorities will “work with the police and parliament to do everything in our power to crack down on threats to elected officials.” (In the U.S., these comments would not meet either the incitement standard or qualify as material support for terrorism, and would be protected by the First Amendment.) And British politicians have made calls including for their disinvitation from Glastonbury as well as prosecution for the “Kill your local MP” remark.

A group of artists including Massive Attack and Pulp issued a statement against what they called a “clear, concerted attempt to censor and ultimately deplatform the band Kneecap.” The band also objected to what it calls a “smear campaign” to “manufacture moral hysteria” but asserted they “do not, and have never, supported Hamas or Hezbollah” and would not “seek to incite violence against any MP or individual. Ever.”

Some similar questions are at play in Mexico over narcocorridos, ballads about drug trafficking. Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum says her “position is that it should not be banned, but that other music should be promoted.” In recent weeks, though, some Mexican states have taken action against the genre.

And last month, U.S. Deputy Secretary of State Christopher Landau announced on X that the State Department revoked the visas of a band who “portrayed images glorifying drug kingpin ‘El Mencho’” at a concert in Mexico. “I’m a firm believer in freedom of expression,” Landau wrote, “but that doesn’t mean that expression should be free of consequences.”

The band, Los Alegres del Barranco, may also be facing criminal charges in Mexico “for allegedly promoting criminal activity.”

The UK’s blasphemy debate is still going

Kneecap’s political commentary isn’t the only free expression controversy in the UK. As I’ve discussed in previous dispatches, UK-based activists have set off global controversies in recent months with public Quran burnings resulting in criminal charges.

The Crown Prosecution Service received well-deserved criticism over its decision to charge a man who burned a Quran outside the Turkish consulate in London with intent to cause “harassment, alarm or distress” against “the religious institution of Islam.” There is no other way to put it: protecting a religious institution from “distress” is a blatant blasphemy law.

In response to critics, the CPS admitted the charge was “incorrectly applied” and has substituted a different charge, a public order offense “on the basis that his actions caused harassment, alarm or distress — which is a criminal offence — and that this was motivated by hostility towards a religious or racial group.”

This prosecution, however, remains a serious threat to free expression and the public debate around it suggests this matter is far from settled. In an exchange on X, one member of parliament chastised another for “invest[ing] so much energy into advocating for the right to offend a minority community” and warned that free expression “comes with limitations and protections.”

From Xi’s critics to Israeli protests, political speech is under attack
- In a recent episode of his HBO show “The Rehearsal,” Nathan Fielder reveals Paramount+ removed an older “Nathan for You” episode from streaming everywhere after Paramount+ Germany became “uncomfortable with what they called anything that touches on antisemitism in the aftermath of the Israel/Hamas attacks.” That episode focused on Fielder’s satirical pitch for a winter coat company to compete with a real life brand affiliated with a Holocaust denier. (From the stunt, Fielder “likely raised millions of dollars toward Holocaust awareness.”)
- Israeli police temporarily warned organizers of a Tel Aviv protest that demonstrators could not use images of Palestinian children and terms like “genocide” and “ethnic cleansing” in protest signs.
- A new Human Rights Watch report finds that Vietnam is ramping up enforcement of its law targeting expression “infringing of state interests.” Now “authorities have enlarged the scope and application of article 331 so that it reaches much further into society, beyond human rights and democracy dissidents — most of whom are now in prison — to all those publicly voicing grievances.”
- A Thai appeals court sentenced a democracy activist to two years in prison for violating the country’s harsh lese-majeste law. In 2022, she posted on Facebook, “The government is shit, the institution is shit.”
- Paul Chambers, the American academic charged with lese-majeste in Thailand, received good news but he’s not out of the woods yet. Prosecutors announced they declined to pursue the charges against him but that decision will face further review.
- At April’s Semafor World Economy Summit, Netflix Co-CEO Ted Sarandos shared that the company previously attempted to build a presence in China but “in three years, not a single episode of a single Netflix show cleared the censorship board.”
- China has disappeared another “Bridge Man.” In an incident similar to one that set off a global protest movement in 2022, an activist hung banners calling for political reform over a bridge outside Chengdu last month and was quickly detained — and his whereabouts are now unknown.
- An investigation of China’s transnational repression methods from the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists found that during “at least seven of Xi’s 31 international trips between 2019 and 2024, local law enforcement infringed on dozens of protesters’ rights in order to shield the Chinese president from dissent, detaining or arresting activists, often for spurious reasons.”
- Last month, the U.S. Department of Justice announced that, at the DOJ’s request, Serbian law enforcement arrested two men alleged to have “coordinated and directed a conspiracy to harass, intimidate, and threaten” a Los Angeles-based critic of Xi Jinping.
- Hong Kong’s national security police arrested family members of the U.S.-based activist Anna Kwok, who is wanted under the city’s national security law, for handling her “funds or other financial assets.”
Conflict with Pakistan brings spike in India’s censorship

India’s censorship, especially on the internet, is a persistent threat to free expression, and the country’s recent flare-up with Pakistan has worsened the situation. Dozens have been arrested for “anti-India comments” on social media and “content supporting Pakistan.”

In a May 8 notice, the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting advised all social media sites and streaming services to “discontinue” content “having its origins in Pakistan with immediate effect.”

At the government’s request, Meta blocked the 6.7 million follower Instagram account @Muslim, one of “the most followed Muslim news sources on Instagram.” X, too, announced it received orders to block over 8,000 users in the country, including “accounts belonging to international news organizations and prominent X users.” X complied and said “due to legal restrictions, we are unable to publish the executive orders at this time” but is exploring avenues to respond.

YouTube, too, is a target. Officials blocked over a dozen Pakistani YoutTube channels for “disseminating provocative and communally sensitive content, false and misleading narratives and misinformation against India.” India’s Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology also restricted access to The Wire, an independent news site, throughout the country.

The latest wins, losses, and challenges for free speech in tech
- It’s not all bad news for free expression in India. This month, India’s Supreme Court reversed a ruling from the Delhi High Court ordering Wikipedia to take down a Wiki page amidst Asian News International’s lawsuit against the Wikimedia Foundation.
- The Wikimedia Foundation is also taking on the UK’s Online Safety Act. The foundation is specifically challenging the act’s Categorisation Regulations, which “are written broadly enough that they could place Wikipedia as a ‘Category 1 service’ — a platform posing the highest possible level of risk to the public.” Among Wikimedia’s objections are the risks this classification poses to its users’ privacy and anonymity.
- Meta secured a significant victory against Israeli spyware company NSO Group, with a jury awarding $168 million in damages. The NSO Group was accused of exploiting Meta’s WhatsApp to install its Pegasus spyware program, which has been used in high profile hacks of lawyers, journalists, and activists, into over a thousand phones.
- X, a regular target of Turkish censorship orders, complied with an order to block the account of imprisoned Istanbul Mayor Ekrem Imamoglu, a rival of President Recep Tayyip Erdogan. X says it is challenging the order.
- Bluesky has complied with Turkish orders, too. The platform restricted access to dozens of accounts in the country on “national security and public order” grounds.
- Russia restricted internet access in regions of the country ahead of its “Victory Day” celebrations on May 9. “We want the glorious Victory Day to be celebrated at the appropriate level,” Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said of the shutdowns.
U.S. embassy warns Stockholm against ‘promoting DEI’

Stockholm announced this month that it was surprised to receive a “bizarre” letter from the U.S. embassy in the city. The letter, copies of which went to contractors abroad who work with the federal government, told Stockholm’s planning office to “certify that they do not operate any programs promoting DEI that violate any applicable anti-discrimination laws.” Companies in Europe have reported receiving these letters, but Stockholm’s planning office is the first government agency known to have received one. Officials conveyed that they would not be complying.

Embassies’ efforts to interfere with expression abroad are an issue I discuss at length in my forthcoming book, Authoritarians in the Academy. In 2021, for example, the Chinese embassy unsuccessfully pressured the Italian city of Brescia to cancel an art exhibition it claimed would “endanger the friendly relations between Italy and China” because it was “full of anti-Chinese lies.”

How press freedom is faring today
- Argentine President Javier Milei is suing three journalists for defamation for their criticism of him, including a column comparing current events with the rise of Nazism and comments calling him an “authoritarian” and a “despot.”
- Swedish journalist Joakim Medin was hit with an 11-month suspended sentence for insulting the Turkish president and is awaiting a trial on terrorism charges. Medin says he was not even in the country when the alleged conduct took place.
- Israel’s Attorney General Gali Baharav-Miara warned government agencies that their boycott of the media outlet Hareetz over its coverage of the Israel-Hamas war “was conducted through an improper process that cannot be upheld legally.”
- Former Sinn Féin leader Gerry Adams’ libel suit against the BBC over reporting that he sanctioned a killing in 2006 is underway. BBC says the reporting followed its editorial standards.
- Two reporters were detained in Macau, a special administrative region of China, for allegedly “disrupting the operations” of authorities after trying to report on a legislative debate.
- Four Russian journalists accused of having ties to Alexey Navalny were sentenced to over five years in a prison colony last month.
- Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas reversed the ban on Al Jazeera, permitting it to resume reporting, after it banned the outlet in January on incitement allegations.
Finally, some good news for a victim of blasphemy laws

Mubarak Bala, a Nigerian humanist initially sentenced to 24 years in prison, is finally tasting freedom upon being released after spending over four years in prison. Mubarak still feared mob violence after his release, and was forced to live in a safe house due to threats.

But Bala has now arrived in Germany, where he is set to begin a residency at Humanistische Vereinigung. “No longer do I dread the routine sounds of the locks, nor the dark, certainly not the extreme weather, too hot or too cold, no longer ill, no longer hungry, no longer lonely, and no longer dreading that the marauders are coming across the fence, to drag me out and behead me,” Bala said in a statement.

The Community Court of the Economic Community of West African States, a high court governing 12 African nations including Nigeria, found last month that a blasphemy statute used to prosecute Bala must be struck down. The Kano State government, however, defended its blasphemy laws and said it “will not allow religious liberty to be weaponized as a cover for sacrilege, insult, and provocation.”
Source link
May 15, 2025
Harvard faculty group pledges 10% of salary to help university fight Trump
This audio is auto-generated. Please let us know if you have feedback.

Dive Brief:
- Dozens of faculty members at Harvard University have signed on to contribute 10% of their salaries, for up to a year, to the institution’s legal fight against the Trump administration.
- As of Friday afternoon, 88 senior faculty had signed the agreement, according to organizers. Of those, 43 have done so publicly.
- The faculty pledge came just before President Donald Trump said his administration will pull Harvard’s tax-exempt status, adding “It’s what they deserve!” in a Friday social media post.
Dive Insight:

This week’s developments are only the latest in the ongoing battle between Harvard and Trump.

In the president’s numerous attacks on higher education, Harvard in particular has borne intense scrutiny from the Trump administration. That aggression escalated significantly in mid-April when the Ivy League institution rebuked demands from federal agencies to interfere in academic matters, becoming the first well-known college to respond so forcefully.

Since then, the administration has slashed Harvard’s federal funding by almost $2.3 billion, threatened billions of dollars more, opened Title VI investigations into it and its law review, and threatened its ability to enroll international students.

Harvard is now suing the Trump administration over what it calls the government’s efforts to withhold federal funding “as leverage to gain control of academic decisionmaking.”

Though Harvard is one of the best-resourced institutions in the country, the legal battle is likely to be arduous and expensive. This week’s faculty salary pledge described the university as facing “severe financial damage for its defense of academic freedom.”

That damage could come in the form of an unprecedented tax bill.

In previous social media posts, Trump said Harvard “is a JOKE, teaches Hate and Stupidity, and should no longer receive Federal Funds” and should “be Taxed as a Political Entity.”

Trump, as president, does not have unilateral legal authority to pull Harvard’s tax exemption, a status bestowed by the Internal Revenue Service. And neither the president nor employees of the executive office can legally direct the IRS to audit or investigate an institution. Federal law requires IRS employees who receive such directions to report them to the agency’s oversight office.

Despite this, CNN reported in April that the IRS was making arrangements to revoke Harvard’s status, just after Trump posted on the matter.

Such a change would significantly escalate Trump’s financial battle against Harvard that prompted the faculty pledge. The 11 faculty members leading the salary pledge said they intend for the signatories to hold a vote.

“If the majority agrees that the university is making a good faith effort to use its own resources in support of staff, student, and academic programs, faculty will proceed with their donation,” their letter said.

The pledge also acknowledged that not all faculty at Harvard are in a position to pledge 10% — or any — of their income and said the salary contribution plan is “only one of the various ways in which we can express solidarity around the university.”

“We also know that many faculty are making important contributions to the Harvard community during this difficult time in other ways, by helping students and staff directly,” it said.
Source link
May 2, 2025
Carnegie Classifications debuts redesign of system to group colleges

This audio is auto-generated. Please let us know if you have feedback.

The American Council on Education and the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching on Thursday released updates to the Carnegie Classifications, including a redesigned system to describe institutions and a new category to identify colleges that boost student access and earnings.

For the system’s basic classifications, colleges were previously grouped together based on the highest degree they awarded — a method that “fell short of adequately describing the full scope of activity on campuses across the country,” according to the announcement.

The basic classifications — renamed the institutional classifications — now group colleges together based on multiple characteristics, such as their size, the types of degrees they confer, and the fields of study they offer. For instance, the classifications will distinguish between institutions mostly focused on graduate education and those that offer a mix of bachelor’s, master’s and doctoral degrees.

Colleges will also be grouped together by size: Those with under 4,000 students will be classified as small, those with over 20,000 students will be considered large, and those in between will be considered medium. Additionally, colleges will be grouped together by their academic program mix, such as whether they primarily award pre-professional degrees.

The updated list has been highly anticipated ever since ACE and the Carnegie Foundation announced they were overhauling the Carnegie Classifications in 2023 to better reflect the diversity of college missions.

“With this redesign of the Carnegie Classifications, we set out to measure what matters,” Mushtaq Gunja, executive director of the Carnegie Classification systems and senior vice

president at ACE, said in a statement. “Nowadays, institutions can’t be reduced down to the highest degree they award because they exist to serve a wide range of students in a wide variety of ways.”

The system also debuted its new Student Access and Earnings Classification. This designation seeks to measure whether colleges are enrolling students reflective of the regions they serve and how well they are preparing them for the job market.

To calculate this, it examines the share of undergraduates receiving Pell Grants and those from underrepresented racial and ethnic backgrounds, along with alumni earnings eight years after enrollment. Researchers then compare these metrics to the demographics of the regions colleges serve.

This classification groups colleges based on their access and whether their former students have relatively higher or lower earnings compared to their regional peers.

Colleges with higher access and earnings are designated Opportunity Colleges and Universities.

Nearly 500 colleges earned this designation. The group includes a wide variety of institutions, including historically Black colleges like Howard University, in Washington, D.C., and large public universities such as Stony Brook University, in New York.

Meanwhile, colleges that provide lower access but higher earnings contain all eight universities that make up the Ivy League, as well as other prestigious colleges, such as Stanford University. This group also included state flagships such as the University of Wisconsin-Madison and the University of Florida.

ACE and the Carnegie Foundation also updated their research designations, releasing their new list of research institutions under the revised metrics in February. The changes resulted in a sharp uptick in the number of institutions that earned the coveted R1 status, denoting the highest levels of research activity.

Source link

April 24, 2025
Five Ways to Use Group Work to Engage College Students (opinion)
A few years ago, we hired an adjunct professor to teach a three-hour night class. After a few weeks, he came to us in frustration because he couldn’t get the students to discuss the material, and when he asked if there were any questions, they never responded.

We probed more. Upon further discussion, we found that his course plan for each night was a three-hour lecture using PowerPoint slides; he didn’t take class planning beyond that. He felt overwhelmed by the responsibility for teaching the content of the course, but he didn’t know where to begin to get the students to contribute, ask questions and actively participate. We immediately put on our coaching hats, working to help him actively engage his class so that students had a deeper learning experience.

We have heard about this frustration with getting students to participate actively in conversations with many other faculty members, in one-on-one coaching or during faculty development sessions. This often happens because faculty members are relying on lecture because that was the way their own professors taught and often the way they were trained to teach in their graduate programs.
When moving into team projects, here are four key actions to take:

Assign students to their teams in a way that is transparent and purposeful. Definitely don’t let students pick their own groups.

Show students your grading rubric when you assign the project. We guarantee your students will be more successful when you do this.

Train students on how to conduct peer evaluation, and include peer evaluations as part of the grade.

Check in frequently with teams to see how they are progressing, and to answer any questions. Your students will appreciate this.
In addition, the distractions that students face when preparing for class and during class time are increasing exponentially. Many are not doing the reading, some are on their phones, more than a few are shopping online during class and some just don’t have the bandwidth left to participate because of their very busy lives outside of school.

How do we help these faculty members start to turn things around? In our experience as professors, group work is a great way to help instructors, new and experienced, to actively engage classes in discussions.

The two of us have had extensive experience using in-class group work and executing in-depth team projects across many different disciplines. On most surveys, employers report that one of the top skills they want from college graduates is the ability to work in teams. Given what employers want, we’d of course like everyone to move away from lectures to engaging students with project-based teamwork. But not everyone is comfortable moving to a system that is so different from their current teaching methods.

So how can we help our struggling adjunct faculty member, and other professors who want to more actively engage their students? Here are five quick and easy ideas to try.
1. A think-pair-share exercise. This occurs when you pose a question, give students a brief time to reflect and think, and then ask them to turn to their neighbor and share their ideas. If you want them to develop their thoughts even more, you can ask them to turn to another pair and join them to discuss the issue (how many times you do this depends on the size of the class); you can even join up more dyads. Then ask the groups to report back with a few key points.
2. Prepared discussion questions. Prepare a series of discussion questions based on the reading for that day or about a problem on which the class is working. Next, organize the class into four- or five-person groups. Give students a reasonable amount of time to work through the questions. While they are working, make sure to circulate through the groups, answer questions, make comments to illustrate some of the ideas and provide prompts to help them. At the conclusion of the discussion, have each group report on the highlights of their discussion and use the opportunity to give a series of mini-lectures on points they described and things they might have missed.
3. Learning through discussion. Developed by William Fawcett Hill, this method is an even more structured approach to group work. We used this method in an upper-level theory course with excellent results. Learning through discussion puts considerable responsibility on a group leader, but if the groups rotate this leadership position across the group each week, it should even out the work (and as a bonus, it can help students develop team leadership skills). The leader synthesizes the material and initiates the discussion. The leader doesn’t teach the group but leads them through an eight-step process to identify major themes in the material and how it integrates with previous knowledge and application. Keeping students in the same groups helps them get used to working together and develop a sense of camaraderie. If you find you need to hold students accountable to help some less motivated ones prepare, you can collect their notes and have the group do quick peer evaluations.
1. Each one, teach one. These sessions are a great way to have students cover a considerable amount of literature in what might be a psychologically safe environment for them. Divide your class into groups of four to five people. Then assign as many readings as you have members of the groups. Each person in the group completes one reading and then leads a group discussion about the article, partially teaching it to the other members of the group. You can have them accomplish all the outside readings during one week, or across multiple weeks, depending on your needs. Students learn from each other, and the one leading the discussion has to spend time learning to dissect one paper.
2. Team projects. Ad hoc group work as we’ve described in the first four ideas is a great way to help students to learn course material for the long haul and spark discussion. Team projects can do this even better. They do, however, take a little more work. Once you are comfortable with breaking the class into groups for ad hoc discussion, you can think about planning a team project. If you’ve never run one before, you may want to start with a small project, something short term (think three to five weeks). As you gain more experience and learn what works for you, your style, and your material, you can then move to bigger, longer projects.
These are just a few of the ways that you can use groups, or even teams, to actively engage students in the material.
Source link
April 18, 2025
Yeshiva U Accepts LGBTQ+ Student Group but Not “Pride” Clubs

Less than a week after Yeshiva University agreed to recognize an LGBTQ+ student club as part of a legal settlement, university president Ari Berman apologized for the way the university conveyed the announcement and stressed that “pride” clubs still run counter to the values of the Modern Orthodox Jewish university, Jewish Telegraphic Agency reported. He emphasized that the newly approved club would function “in accordance with halacha,” or Jewish law.

“I deeply apologize to the members of our community—our students and parents, alumni and friends, faculty and Rabbis—for the way the news was rolled out,” Berman, a rabbi, wrote in an email to students Tuesday. “Instead of clarity, it sowed confusion. Even more egregiously, misleading ‘news’ articles said that Yeshiva had reversed its position, which is absolutely untrue.”

The university has been mired in a legal battle with its LGBTQ+ student group, the YU Pride Alliance, since 2021, when the group sued for official university recognition. Yeshiva said it wasn’t legally required to recognize the club because of Orthodoxy’s stance against same-sex relations. The two parties announced a settlement last week in which students will run an LGBTQ+ club called Hareni that will “operate in accordance with the approved guidelines of Yeshiva University’s senior rabbis,” according to a joint statement issued last Thursday.

LGBTQ+ students celebrated the settlement as a new milestone. But Berman framed the settlement as doubling down on an old proposal from 2022, when the university sought to create its own LGBTQ+ student club called Kol Yisrael Areivim. Plaintiffs rejected the plan at the time, on the grounds that the club wouldn’t be student-run. But Berman said Hareni was similarly created “to support students who are striving to live authentic, uncompromising” lives within the bounds of Jewish law, “as previously described.”

“The Yeshiva has always conveyed that what a Pride club represents is antithetical to the undergraduate program in which the traditional view of marriage and genders being determined at birth are transmitted,” Berman wrote in his message to students. “The Yeshiva never could and never would sanction such an undergraduate club and it is due to this that we entered litigation.”

As he sees it, “last week, the plaintiffs in the lawsuit against YU accepted to run Hareni, instead of what they were originally suing us for, moved to end the case, and the case has been dismissed.”

Source link

March 27, 2025
AAUP, Middle East Studies Group Sue Trump Over Deportations

Accusing the Trump administration of creating a “climate of repression and fear on university campuses,” two faculty groups sued the federal government Tuesday to stop the president’s efforts to deport noncitizen students and faculty who have participated in pro-Palestinian protests.

The Middle East Studies Association and the American Association of University Professors argue in the lawsuit that what they call Trump’s “ideological-deportation policy” violates the First and Fifth Amendments and the Administrative Procedure Act. They are asking a federal judge to rule that the policy is unconstitutional. This is the second lawsuit challenging the policy, though this legal action includes more faculty and students.

The litigation comes after immigration officers have, over the past month, targeted international students and postdoctoral fellows for alleged participation in pro-Palestinian protests, raiding their dorm rooms and revoking their visas.

Tuesday afternoon, a federal judge blocked the Trump administration from deporting a Columbia student, who moved to the United States from Korea when she was 7 but is now a legal permanent resident. The New York Times reported that the government argued Yunseo Chung’s “presence in the United States hinders the administration’s foreign policy goal of stopping the spread of antisemitism.”

But the judge said Tuesday that “nothing in the record” showed that Chung posed a “foreign-policy risk,” according to the Times.

Chung has not yet been detained. She’s just the latest student to come under fire from the administration’s crackdown on those who protested the Israel-Hamas war. That crackdown has included revoking the visas of students and faculty, giving universities names of students to target, and a social media surveillance program, according to the AAUP lawsuit.

The MESA and AAUP lawsuit, filed in the U.S. District Court of Massachusetts, specifically cites the cases of Chung; Badar Khan Suri, a Georgetown University postdoc; and Mahmoud Khalil, a recent Columbia University graduate. Judges have also blocked the government from deporting both men.

“While President Trump and other administration officials have described pro-Palestinian campus protests as ‘pro-Hamas,’ they have stretched that label beyond the breaking point to encompass any speech supportive of Palestinian human rights or critical of Israel’s military actions in Gaza,” the suit says. “They have left no doubt that their new policy entails the arrest, detention and deportation of noncitizen students and faculty for constitutionally protected speech and association.”

Attorneys from the Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia are among the lawyers representing the scholarly groups.

MESA and the AAUP—along with the AAUP chapters at Harvard, New York and Rutgers Universities—filed the suit against the federal government, Trump, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Homeland Security secretary Kristi Noem and Immigration and Customs Enforcement acting director Todd Lyons, plus their agencies.

A DHS spokesperson said in a statement that “taking over buildings, defacing private property, and harassing Jewish students does not constitute free speech.”

“It is a privilege to be granted a visa to live and study in the United States of America,” the spokesperson added. “When you advocate for violence and terrorism that privilege should be revoked, and you should not be in this country.”

The White House provided a similar statement from a Justice Department spokesperson, who said, “This department makes no apologies for its efforts to defend President Trump’s agenda in court and protect Jewish Americans from vile antisemitism.”

Beyond the immediate implications for students and faculty who face deportation, the policy has a broader chilling effect on campus free speech, the lawsuit argues.

“Out of fear that they might be arrested and deported for lawful expression and association, some noncitizen students and faculty have stopped attending public protests or resigned from campus groups that engage in political advocacy,” the suit says. “Others have declined opportunities to publish commentary and scholarship, stopped contributing to classroom discussions, or deleted past work from online databases and websites. Many now hesitate to address political issues on social media, or even in private texts.”

The lawsuit adds the policy harms the plaintiff associations “because they are no longer able to learn from and engage with noncitizen members to the extent they once did, and because they have had to divert resources from other projects to address the all-too-real possibility that their noncitizen members will be arrested, imprisoned, and deported for exercising rights that the Constitution guarantees.”

Source link

March 26, 2025
LAWSUIT: LGBTQ student group sues to overturn Texas A&M’s unconstitutional drag ban

HOUSTON, Texas, March 5, 2025 — The Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression filed a federal lawsuit on behalf of an LGBTQ+ student organization to block a new policy from the Texas A&M University System that bans drag performances on its 11 public campuses — a clear violation of the First Amendment.

FIRE is asking a court in the Southern District of Texas to halt Texas A&M officials from enforcing the drag ban, abruptly adopted on Friday afternoon. The lawsuit is on behalf of the Queer Empowerment Council, a coalition of student organizations at Texas A&M University-College Station and the organizers of the fifth annual “Draggieland” event that was scheduled to be held on campus on March 27.

“We refuse to let Texas A&M dictate which voices belong on campus,” said the Queer Empowerment Council. “Drag is self-expression, drag is discovery, drag is empowerment, and no amount of censorship will silence us.”

Texas A&M students first held “Draggieland” (a portmanteau of “Drag” and “Aggieland,” a nickname for Texas A&M) at the campus theatre complex in 2020, and the event has been held on campus annually ever since. But last Friday, the Board of Regents suddenly voted to ban drag events entirely across all 11 Texas A&M campuses.

“The board finds that it is inconsistent with the system’s mission and core values of its universities, including the value of respect for others, to allow special event venues of the universities to be used for drag shows,” the board’s resolution reads. The regents also claimed that drag performances are “offensive” and “likely to create or contribute to a hostile environment for women.”

“Public universities can’t shut down student expression simply because the administration doesn’t like the ‘ideology’ or finds the expression ‘demeaning,’” said FIRE attorney Adam Steinbaugh. “That’s true not only of drag performances, but also religion, COVID, race, politics, and countless other topics where campus officials are too often eager to silence dissent.”

The regents’ attempts to justify the drag ban as anything other than illegal viewpoint discrimination are feeble. The board admits they want to ban drag on campus because they find it “demeans women,” “promotes gender ideology,” or runs contrary to their “values”—- but the First Amendment squarely protects speech that offends and even angers others. And in all cases, it prevents campus officials from silencing speech because they disagree with the “ideology.” As a taxpayer-funded university system, Texas A&M campuses cannot treat some student events differently simply because they dislike the view being expressed.

“Even putting on an on-campus production of Shakespeare or Mrs. Doubtfire, or taking part in powderpuff, could be banned at A&M if some hostile administrator thinks they ‘promote gender ideology,’” said FIRE senior attorney JT Morris. “But if the First Amendment means anything, it’s that the government can’t silence ideologies they don’t like — real or perceived.”

Title IX’s prohibition on creating a “hostile environment” also does not give public universities the ability to run around the First Amendment. FIRE has long seen efforts to suppress speech on the basis that it might contribute to a “hostile environment” because someone finds it offensive, but if speech can be suppressed because someone believes it is offensive, no speech is safe. The First Amendment does not permit public universities to suppress speech because someone thinks it is inappropriate.

In order to fit the definition of harassment the Supreme Court has established, speech must be “objectively offensive” AND “severe” AND “pervasive.” A once-a-year drag show in an enclosed theatre that requires a ticket to enter doesn’t even come close to satisfying those strict conditions.

“If other students dislike or disagree with Draggieland, the solution is simple: don’t go,” said FIRE attorney Jeff Zeman. “Or they could organize a protest, as students opposing drag have in the past. The First Amendment protects drag and the ability to criticize drag — and it forbids the government silencing the side it disagrees with.”

Finally, the regents’ motion notes that “there are alternative locations for such events off-campus.” But that violates the First Amendment, too. The government cannot censor speech in places the First Amendment protects it, just because a speaker might express themselves elsewhere. “Draggieland” highlights why that principle is so vital: if a student group can’t reach their campus community with their message, then their message can’t fulfill its purpose.

In the face of unconstitutional censorship, Draggieland organizers have remained unbowed. They have announced to supporters that they will hold an on-campus “Day of Drag” protest on Thursday and that they are committed to holding the event even if forced off-campus.

“We are committed to ensuring that our voices are heard, and that Draggieland will go on, no matter the obstacles we face,” the Queer Empowerment Council announced.

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 recognizes that colleges and universities play a vital role in preserving free thought within a free society. To this end, we place a special emphasis on defending the individual rights of students and faculty members on our nation’s campuses, including freedom of speech, freedom of association, due process, legal equality, religious liberty, and sanctity of conscience.

CONTACT:

Alex Griswold, Communications Campaign Manager, FIRE: 215-717-3473; media@thefire.org

Source link

March 5, 2025
EdTech for International Education via the Gateway International Group

The Gateway International Group just launched a compilation of EdTech companies/platforms for International Education. Compiled and edited by Erin Niday and Tony Ogden, this compilation has the goal of highlighting those EdTech platforms that have the potential to transform next generational international learning and engagement. You can learn more at https://gatewayinternational.org/edtech/.

Note: I’m an affiliate of the Gateway International Group but receive no compensation for this post.

Source link

February 25, 2021