Tag: Professor

  • OSU Professor On Leave After Tackling Documentarian

    OSU Professor On Leave After Tackling Documentarian

    An Ohio State University professor who was recently hired to help advance free speech and civil discourse is now on administrative leave after assaulting a documentarian on campus, university officials confirmed Wednesday.

    On Monday evening, Luke Perez—an assistant professor affiliated with OSU’s legislatively mandated Salmon P. Chase Center for Civics, Culture and Society—invited E. Gordon Gee to speak to his Profiles in American Leadership class. Gee, a two-time president of OSU, was hired last August as a consultant for the center, which Republican lawmakers have characterized as a space to promote “intellectual diversity” and prevent alleged leftist ideology from “replacing the lessons of history.”

    But after Gee spoke to the class in the five-story Smith Laboratory building, D.J. Byrnes, author of the local left-wing newsletter The Rooster, and Mike Newman, a local documentarian, intercepted Gee as he exited a public restroom. They began asking him questions about his awareness of a campus doctor’s sexual abuse of student athletes during his presidency; his recent defense of Leslie Wexner, a billionaire and former board chair of OSU whose communications with convicted sex offender Jeffery Epstein are under scrutiny; and his decision to sell OSU’s parking lots to a private equity firm.

    “We wanted to get Gee on the record about some of the big issues here,” Byrnes told Inside Higher Ed on Wednesday. A video Byrnes posted on The Rooster’s website shows Gee and Byrnes engaging in a lengthy yet calm discussion in a hallway. Gee, however, declined to answer most of Byrnes’s questions, save to say that selling OSU’s parking lots for nearly $500 million “was one of the best decisions I’ve ever made.”

    During the parking lot discussion, Gee began to walk away, the video shows. And soon after, the situation accelerated from “zero to 60,” Byrnes said.

    Another video Byrnes posted shows both Perez—a scholar of American grand strategy, the ethics of war and religion and international politics—and Christopher Green, associate director of the Salmon P. Chase Center, watching at least the end of the interaction between Byrnes and Gee.

    “We agreed that he would talk to you for a few minutes,” Green said as Gee walked through double doors into a nearby classroom.

    But Newman, the documentarian who was there independently of Byrnes, said he hadn’t agreed to anything and wanted to ask Gee a few more questions. Green and Perez refused.

    “You do not need to ask him more questions,” Green said.

    “He already said it was his last question, so we’re going to have to ask you guys to leave now,” Perez added in a calm tone.

    “Just one more,” said Newman, who was holding a camera and cellphone as he moved closer to Perez, but did not appear to touch him.

    “No,” Perez said before knocking the phone from Newman’s hands and tackling him to the ground.

    @rooster_ohio Wednesday on The Rooster: A visit to Ohio State’s right-wing bastion of free speech ends with Assistant Professor Lucas Perez assaulting a documentarian for wanting to ask Vice President E. Gordon Gee a single question about student loan debt. Full story at 4:33 a.m. in your mailbox. #ohio #ohiostate #ohiostateuniversity #ohiocheck #gobucks ♬ original sound – The Rooster

    But the confrontation didn’t stop there, another video Byrnes posted shows.

    After the assault, Byrnes tried to board an elevator alongside Green and Gee. While Green attempted to block Byrnes, he eventually got on the elevator. In the video, Green can be heard raising his voice, accusing Byrnes of assaulting him multiple times while asking a nearby woman to call the police. The video does not show Byrnes touching Green.

    “We’ll see who considers what assault [is] when we’re done,” Byrnes said. “It’s all on video.”

    @rooster_ohio The Bust Up of E. Gordon Gee happened Monday night in Smith Lab. It was a normal affair until Assistant Ohio State Professor Luke Perez attacked a cameraman. Full story (with video) to come Wednesday on The Rooster. #ohio #ohiotok #ohiocheck #ohiostate #ohiostateuniversity ♬ original sound – The Rooster

    Perez declined to comment about the incident and referred all questions to OSU’s communications office.

    “We are aware of the incident, and it is very concerning,” Ben Johnson, an OSU spokesperson, wrote in an email. “The faculty member involved has been placed on administrative leave pending a full OSUPD investigation and thorough review of the facts.”

    Byrnes and Newman have filed a police report about the incident, though it’s not clear if charges have been or will be filed against Perez. Inside Higher Ed requested a copy of the police incident report but did not receive it before publication Wednesday.

    Byrnes said he wants Perez to face some accountability for tackling Newman, though Newman himself could not be reached for comment.

    “He doesn’t deserve to lose his livelihood and never work again,” Byrnes said. “But at the same time, I do believe there needs to be legal consequences.”



    Source link

  • Clemson Settles With Professor Fired for Kirk Comments

    Clemson Settles With Professor Fired for Kirk Comments

    Bregy will resign from his position at Clemson on May 15, 2026, according to the settlement agreement.

    sbrogan/E+/Getty Images

    Clemson University has agreed to rescind the termination of Joshua Bregy, an assistant professor in the department of environmental engineering and earth sciences, nearly four months after dismissing him for resharing a post on his personal Facebook page that criticized the late conservative commentator Charlie Kirk.

    Bregy sued after he was terminated on Sept. 26, claiming that his firing violated his First Amendment rights. As part of the settlement, Bregy will receive pay and benefits “throughout the original term of his employment,” the ACLU of South Carolina, which represented Bregy, said in a news release. In addition, Clemson provost Robert Jones agreed to “provide positive letters of recommendation to potential employers based on Dr. Bregy’s classroom teaching.” For Bregy’s part, he agreed to drop his lawsuit and resign from his position at Clemson effective May 15, 2026. He will not have any teaching, research or other faculty obligations through the spring semester, according to the release.

    Bregy was among the dozens of faculty members targeted by right-wing politicians and online commentators for making or sharing critical posts about Kirk after his death. The post Bregy shared said, in part: “I’ll never advocate for violence in any form, but it sounds to me like karma is sometimes swift and ironic. As Kirk said, ‘play certain games, win certain prizes.’”

    “We were honored to represent Dr. Bregy and to reach an agreement that restores his employment, allows him to continue to pursue research funding, and deters the university from violating the First Amendment rights of its faculty in the future,” Allen Chaney, legal director at the ACLU of South Carolina, said in a statement. “Politicians and university administrators come and go, but years from now we will still be here. So will the U.S. Constitution.”

    Source link

  • Austin Peay Reinstates Professor Fired Over Kirk Headline

    Austin Peay Reinstates Professor Fired Over Kirk Headline

    Michael was terminated by Austin Peay State University in September.

    csfotoimages/iStock/Getty Images

    Nearly four months after he was terminated for reposting a news headline that quoted the late conservative commentator Charlie Kirk’s position on gun rights, Darren Michael has been reinstated as a professor of theater at Austin Peay State University, Clarksville Now reported. 

    Michael returned to the classroom in late December. The university will also pay him $500,000 and reimburse therapeutic counseling services as part of the settlement.

    “APSU agrees to issue a statement acknowledging regret for not following the tenure termination process in connection with the Dispute,” the settlement agreement reads in part. “The statement will be distributed via email through APSU’s reasonable communication channels to faculty, staff, and students.”

    Shortly after Kirk was shot and killed at a campus event in September, Michael shared a screenshot of a 2023 Newsweek headline on his personal social media account that read, “Charlie Kirk Says Gun Deaths ‘Unfortunately’ Worth it to Keep 2nd Amendment.” His repost was picked up by conservative social media accounts, and his personally identifying information was distributed. It also caught the attention of Tennessee Sen. Marsha Blackburn, who shared Michael’s post alongside his headshot and bio with the line “What do you say, @austinpeay?” Michael was terminated Sept. 12. 

    Michael did not respond to a request for comment Wednesday. A spokesperson for Austin Peay State declined to comment.

    Source link

  • Texas A&M to philosophy professor: Nix Plato or be reassigned

    Texas A&M to philosophy professor: Nix Plato or be reassigned

    Texas A&M philosophy professor Martin Peterson has a choice: Drop readings related to race and gender — including ones by Plato — from his course, or face reassignment. 

    Just weeks ago, FIRE warned that A&M policy banning professors from teaching issues of “race or gender ideology” and “sexual orientation” in core courses violates faculty academic freedom. The First Amendment prohibits public universities from deciding which viewpoints can be taught in a classroom, and which must be banished.

    The following can be attributed to Lindsie Rank, director of Campus Rights Advocacy at FIRE.

    Texas A&M now believes Plato doesn’t belong in an introductory philosophy course. The philosophy department is demanding that professor Martin Peterson remove Platonic readings because they “may” touch on race or gender ideology. He’s been given until the end of the day to comply or be reassigned. This is what happens when the board of regents gives university bureaucrats veto power over academic content. The board didn’t just invite censorship, they unleashed it with immediate and predictable consequences. You don’t protect students by banning 2,400-year-old philosophy.

    Source link

  • VICTORY: Court vindicates professor investigated for parodying university’s ‘land acknowledgment’ on syllabus

    VICTORY: Court vindicates professor investigated for parodying university’s ‘land acknowledgment’ on syllabus

    • Universities can’t encourage professors to wade into controversial subjects, then punish professors for disagreeing with the administration
    • Court: “Student discomfort with a professor’s views can prompt discussion and disapproval. But this discomfort is not grounds for the university retaliating against the professor.”

    SEATTLE, Dec. 19, 2025 — The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit today delivered a decisive victory for the First Amendment rights of public university faculty in Reges v. Cauce. Reversing a federal district court’s opinion, the Ninth Circuit held University of Washington officials violated the First Amendment when they punished Professor Stuart Reges for substituting his satirical take on the university’s preferred “land acknowledgment” statement on his syllabus.

    On Dec. 8, 2021, Reges criticized land acknowledgment statements in an email to faculty, and on Jan. 3, 2022, he parodied UW’s model statement in his syllabus: “I acknowledge that by the labor theory of property the Coast Salish people can claim historical ownership of almost none of the land currently occupied by the University of Washington.” Reges’s statement was a nod to John Locke’s philosophical theory that property rights are established by labor.

    COURTESY PHOTOS FOR MEDIA USE

    Represented by FIRE, Reges filed a First Amendment lawsuit in July 2022 challenging the university’s actions, which included a months-long “harassment” investigation. University officials created a competing class, so students wouldn’t have to take a computer science class from someone who didn’t parrot the university’s preferred opinions. 

    “Today’s opinion is a resounding victory for Professor Stuart Reges and the First Amendment rights of public university faculty,” said FIRE attorney Gabe Walters. “The Ninth Circuit agreed with what FIRE has said from the beginning: Universities can’t force professors to parrot an institution’s preferred political views under pain of punishment.”

    Writing for the majority, Circuit Judge Daniel Bress stated: “A public university investigated, reprimanded, and threatened to discipline a professor for contentious statements he made in a class syllabus. The statements, which mocked the university’s model syllabus statement on an issue of public concern, caused offense in the university community. Yet debate and disagreement are hallmarks of higher education. Student discomfort with a professor’s views can prompt discussion and disapproval. But this discomfort is not grounds for the university retaliating against the professor. We hold that the university’s actions toward the professor violated his First Amendment rights.”

    That’s exactly right. 

    “Today’s opinion recognizes that sometimes, ‘exposure to views that distress and offend is a form of education unto itself,’” said FIRE Legal Director Will Creeley. “As we always say at FIRE: If you graduate from college without once being offended, you should ask for your money back.”

    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:

    Karl de Vries, Director of Media Relations, FIRE: 215-717-3473; [email protected]

    Source link

  • Purdue Professor Declines MLA Prize Due to Policies on Gaza

    Purdue Professor Declines MLA Prize Due to Policies on Gaza

    She had been awarded the prize for her book Ghostly Pasts, Capitalist Presence: A Social History of Fear in Colonial Bengal, published in August 2024.

    Tithi Bhattacharya, a history professor at Purdue University, formally declined the Modern Language Association’s Aldo and Jeanne Scaglione Prize for South Asian Studies in protest of decisions by the MLA regarding Israel’s attacks on Gaza. 

    “This decision is not a reflection of the committee’s rigorous work or the value of the prize itself, but a stand taken in light of the institutional silence and policy decisions made by the Modern Language Association regarding the ongoing genocide in Palestine, including the MLA leadership’s appalling suppression of the Delegate Assembly’s right to vote on a proposed resolution to boycott, sanction, and divest from Israel,” Bhattacharya wrote Wednesday in a blog post about her decision. 

    She had been awarded the 2025 prize for her book Ghostly Pasts, Capitalist Presence: A Social History of Fear in Colonial Bengal, published in August 2024. 

    “I also hope that by declining, I can contribute to the urgent conversation about the ethical responsibilities of professional academic organizations when facing colonialism, brutal state violence, and genocide,” Bhattacharya wrote. “My book, which my generous colleagues on the committee have recognized, is about how colonial capitalism does not even spare ghosts. Against such power, I still believe our weapon remains solidarity.” 

    Source link

  • ICE Detains Oklahoma Professor With H-1B Visa

    ICE Detains Oklahoma Professor With H-1B Visa

    Abedini’s detention makes real the fears of many foreign and American academics who are rethinking or boycotting travel to academic conferences in the U.S.

    Peter Zay/AFP/Getty Images

    Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents detained a University of Oklahoma professor Saturday while he was on his way to a conference.

    Vahid Abedini, a professor of Iranian Studies, was stopped and detained while he was boarding his flight to attend the Middle East Studies Association conference in Washington, D.C. He was released Monday night, according to a LinkedIn post.

    “I’m relieved to share that I was released from custody tonight. It was a deeply distressing experience, especially seeing those without the support I had,” Abedini wrote on LinkedIn early Tuesday morning. “My sincere thanks to my friends and colleagues at the University of Oklahoma, the Middle East Studies Association, and the wider Iran studies and political science community for helping resolve this.”

    Abedini did not respond to Inside Higher Ed’s request for comment. According to Joshua Landis, Abedini’s colleague and co-director of the Center for Middle East Studies at the University of Oklahoma, Abedini has an H-1B visa.

    “ICE arrested our beloved professor Vahid Abedini,” Landis wrote on X Monday. “He has been wrongfully detained because he has a valid H-1B visa—a non-immigrant work visa granted to individuals in ‘specialty occupations,’ including higher education faculty. We are praying for his swift release.”

    Reached for comment, a Department of Homeland Security spokesperson told Inside Higher Ed: “This Iranian national was detained for standard questioning. He’s been released.”

    Abedini’s detention makes real the fears of many foreign and American academics who are rethinking or boycotting travel to academic conferences in the U.S. due to concerns about wrongful arrests by immigration enforcement.

    In a statement, the MESA Board of Directors said they were “disturbed” to learn of Abedini’s detention and “deeply concerned” about the circumstances. The University of Oklahoma declined to comment on the situation.

    Source link

  • Texas A&M committee sides with professor fired amid conservative furor

    Texas A&M committee sides with professor fired amid conservative furor

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

    Dive Brief:

    • A Texas A&M University committee unanimously ruled last week that the public institution wrongly fired an English professor amid conservative furor over her classroom instruction on gender identity. 
    • The university terminated Melissa McCoul in September after a conservative state lawmaker shared a video of her teaching about gender and called for her to be fired. Texas Gov. Greg Abbott joined the lawmaker’s call to fire McCoul. 
    • On Nov. 18, the university’s Committee on Academic Freedom, Responsibility and Tenure voted 8-0 that Texas A&M “had no justification for dismissing” McCoul and “failed to follow required procedures at multiple stages,” according to a Sunday statement from the Texas A&M chapter of the American Association of University Professors.

    Dive Insight:

    In September, Texas State Rep. Brian Harrison posted a video to social media of McCoul teaching about gender identity in children’s literature and accused both her and Texas A&M of perpetuating “DEI and LGBTQ indoctrination.” Although Harrison didn’t name McCoul at the time and the video did not show her face, she was later confirmed to be the professor. 

    He called for both McCoul and then-President Mark Welsh III to be fired. 

    The university terminated McCoul just a day after Harrison’s social media posts. Welsh said she was fired for teaching coursework that did not match the class’s catalog description. 

    “This isn’t about academic freedom; it’s about academic responsibility,” Welsh said at the time. “Our degree programs and courses go through extensive approval processes, and we must ensure that what we ultimately deliver to students is consistent with what was approved.”

    Welsh ultimately stepped down as president later that month under political pressure, receiving a $3.5 million settlement from the Texas A&M University System’s governing board.

    McCoul’s firing quickly drew backlash from free speech and academic freedom groups, including PEN America, the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression, the Texas American Federation of Teachers, and the Texas AAUP conference. They raised concerns about due process and accused the university of acquiescing to political pressure.

    McCoul appealed her termination with the university soon thereafter. 

    A Texas A&M faculty council in late September determined that the university’s decision to fire McCoul violated her academic freedom and that Welsh failed to follow university rules when dismissing her, according to The Texas Tribune. It also found that McCoul’s syllabus was consistent with the corresponding course catalog entry and description. 

    But a senior Texas A&M administrator dismissed those findings in an October memo, saying the matter had not been assigned to the council and that the group had acted outside of its purview.

    The administrator classified McCoul’s firing as “largely unrelated to academic freedom” and said the council should not have reviewed the incident without the approval of the university’s Faculty Affairs office, according to the Tribune. 

    Last week, the university’s Committee on Academic Freedom, Responsibility and Tenure — which reviews faculty appeals of dismissals — ultimately voted in McCoul’s favor when reviewing her case.

    The committee did not find evidence Texas A&M discussed its plans to fire McCoul with her, nor did it give her meaningful notice, according to excerpts of the decision shared by Texas A&M’s AAUP chapter. 

    CAFRT also disputed the university’s assertion that McCoul was responsible for the alleged discrepancy between her class’s course description and her instruction.  

    “The CAFRT committee found no documentary evidence that Dr. McCoul was included in discussions about the special topics course,” it said. “More critically, Dr. McCoul does not have the authority to designate her own courses; it is the College of Arts and Sciences and the English department administration’s responsibility to do so.”

    Texas A&M’s interim president, Tommy Williams, may either accept or reject the committee’s findings. McCoul will be reinstated if he accepts them, but her dismissal will be final if he rejects them, according to a university webpage detailing the process. 

    A university spokesperson said Monday that Texas A&M officials “are aware of the non-binding findings.” 

    “Williams has received the committee’s report and will review it carefully before making a decision in the coming days or weeks,” the spokesperson said in an email.

    McCoul’s lawyer, Amanda Reichek, told the Associated Press that Texas A&M appears poised to fight the committee’s decision amid continued political pressure. The dispute, she said, seems headed for court.

    “Dr. McCoul asserts that the flimsy reasons proffered by A&M for her termination are a pretext for the University’s true motivation: capitulation to Governor Abbott’s demands,” Reichek said in a statement.

    Texas A&M’s AAUP chapter on Sunday called the university’s rationale to fire the professor “troubling and bizarre” and called for her to be reinstated, saying the university had “improperly shifted blame for its own repeated failures to follow established written policies onto Dr. McCoul.”

    “Dr. McCoul has a long and distinguished record of exceptional teaching and service to Texas A&M,” the group said. “The vilification, trauma, and reputational harm she has endured at the hands of Texas A&M for simply doing her job must be acknowledged and corrected.“

    Last week’s news comes after the Texas A&M system implemented significant policy changes related to the conservative contretemps around McCoul.

    On Nov. 13, Texas A&M regents announced that none of the courses at the system’s 12 universities “may teach race or gender ideology or topics related to sexual orientation or gender identity.” To teach such topics, professors will be required to get advanced authorization from their institution’s president.

    The change similarly spurred outcry from academic and free speech advocates.

    Source link

  • Law professor sues University of Kentucky after suspension over criticizing Israel

    Law professor sues University of Kentucky after suspension over criticizing Israel

    The University of Kentucky suspended tenured professor Ramsi Woodcock in July for his comments about Israel. Now, Woodcock is suing his university for violating his First Amendment rights.

    Woodcock’s lawsuit, filed last week in federal district court in Kentucky, asks the judge for two things: let him go back to teaching and stop the university from enforcing the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s definition of antisemitism. 

    TAKE ACTION: Stop University of Kentucky’s Free Speech Crackdown

    The lawsuit lays out a damning timeline of UK’s abuse of his First Amendment rights. Woodcock, long an outspoken critic of Israel, remained steadily employed at UK for seven years, gaining tenure in 2022 and a promotion to full professorship this year. But less than two weeks after his promotion, UK removed him from teaching and banned him from campus. This was purportedly because of unspecified complaints about his  petition to a faculty listserv in March 2024, more than a year earlier, calling for global war against Israel and its annihilation. On his website, antizionist.net, he claims Israel is waging a genocide and that the world has a “moral duty” to step in. 

    After UK suspended Woodcock, describing his online petition as “calling for the destruction of a people based on national origin,” FIRE’s Faculty Legal Defense Fund, which provides legal resources for faculty free of charge, intervened with UK to explain that Woodcock’s speech was protected by the First Amendment. While members of the public or UK’s community may have taken offense to Woodcock’s strong views about Israel, faculty members have the First Amendment right to present arguments on matters of public concern outside the classroom. Using Woodcock’s speech as a cudgel to remove him from the classroom was a clear violation of his expressive rights as a faculty member at UK.

    The FLDF also announced that Joe Childers, a Kentucky-based attorney, would defend Woodcock through the university’s investigative process. Now Woodcock is taking his fight to court. The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) is representing Woodcock in the lawsuit, with help from the Chicago-based law firm Kapitan Gomaa Law. Childers is serving as local counsel. 

    “The University’s suspension of Professor Woodcock violates his First Amendment right of freedom of expression and his right to procedural due process, discriminates against him in violation of the Civil Rights Act of 1866, threatens the democratic principles which sustain this Country’s form of government, and degrades the quality of education at the University of Kentucky,” the lawsuit states.

    A university cannot censor the ideas it dislikes out of existence. And it certainly cannot punish its own faculty for making provocative arguments both at the university and in the court of public opinion. FIRE will keep readers apprised about the status of Woodcock’s lawsuit. 

    If you are a public university or college professor facing investigations or punishment for your speech, contact the Faculty Legal Defense Fund: Submit a case or call the 24-hour hotline at 254-500-FLDF (3533).

    Source link

  • Ky. Professor “Reassigned” After Call for War on Israel Sues

    Ky. Professor “Reassigned” After Call for War on Israel Sues

    The University of Kentucky’s administration building. A professor is suing the institution.

    BD Images/iStock Editorial/Getty Images Plus

    The University of Kentucky law professor who was removed from teaching amid his calls for a global war on Israel to end its existence as a state is now suing his institution and the U.S. education secretary.

    On his website, antizionist.net, Ramsi Woodcock asks fellow legal scholars to sign a “Petition for Military Action Against Israel.” He says Israel is a colony and war is needed to decolonize, and he calls for the war to continue until “Israel has submitted permanently and unconditionally to the government of Palestine everywhere from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea.”

    In his lawsuit, filed Thursday in U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky, Woodcock asks a judge to order the university and top officials to restore his normal teaching and other duties, allow him back into the College of Law building, end the university’s investigation of him, and pay monetary damages. But he also asks the judge to order Education Secretary Linda McMahon to “refrain from requiring or using” the controversial International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance definition of antisemitism when enforcing Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

    The IHRA says antisemitism “might include the targeting of the state of Israel,” “comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis” or claims “that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavor.” Earlier this year, Kentucky state lawmakers ordered public universities to use the IHRA definition in their policies combating antisemitism. Woodcock is also asking the judge to declare that that order violates the First Amendment.

    His lawsuit alleges the state and federal actions are related to his “suspension,” saying the university’s tolerance of his speech “ended in summer 2025” after the federal government threatened to withdraw funding from universities and moved to enforce the IHRA definition. He also cited the passage of the state legislation that “enabled and pressured administrators to suppress speech critical of Israel and Zionism.”

    The Education Department didn’t respond to requests for comment Friday. A university spokesperson said Woodcock hasn’t been suspended but was “reassigned pending the outcome of an investigation,” adding that the university will be “limited in our comments while that investigation is ongoing.”

    In an email to Inside Higher Ed, Woodcock responded, “Israel is a colonization project that practices apartheid and is currently exterminating two million Palestinians in Gaza. The scandal is not that I am calling for immediate military action to end Israel but that the university is willing to violate our nation’s constitution in order to preserve Israel. Every American scholar has a First Amendment right to oppose Israel and I look forward to holding the university accountable for breaking the law.”

    Source link