Tag: State

  • Virginia lawmakers threaten state funding consequences if UVA signs Trump compact

    Virginia lawmakers threaten state funding consequences if UVA signs Trump compact

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

    Dive Brief:

    • Three leading Virginia state senators this week urged University of Virginia’s top officials to immediately reject the Trump administration’s proposed higher education compact and threatened the institution’s state funding if they signed on.
    • In an Oct. 7 letter to UVA leaders, Democratic state Sens. Scott Surovell, L. Louise Lucas and Mamie Locke called the federal government’s conditions “an unprecedented federal intrusion into institutional autonomy and academic freedom.” 
    • Agreeing to those terms would invite further federal interference at the university, the trio said, citing the Trump administration’s recent ouster of UVA’s president. If UVA agrees to the compact, they warned, the institution will face “significant consequences in future Virginia budget cycles.”

    Dive Insight:

    The Trump administration’s compact would offer UVA, along with eight other research universities, preferential access to federal research funding if they agree to its wide-ranging and unprecedented conditions. 

    Some of those terms are straightforward, such as a five-year tuition freeze, a standardized testing requirement for admissions and a 15% cap on international students’ share of undergraduate enrollment.

    Others are less clear cut, including required public audits of the viewpoints of employees and students, institutional neutrality on most political and social events, and a commitment to changing — or ending — institutional units that purposefully “punish” or “belittle” conservative ideas.

    All of the proposed conditions of the agreement “are fundamentally incompatible with the mission and values of a premier public research university,” the lawmakers told UVA Interim President Paul Mahoney and Rachel Sheridan, head of the institution’s governing board. 

    For instance, the state senators raised alarms about one element of the compact that would bar signatories with large endowments from charging tuition for students enrolled in “hard science programs.”

    That would force students in humanities and social sciences “to subsidize” those enrolled in STEM programs, representing “a bizarre federal intrusion into institutional financial planning that devalues essential fields of study,” they wrote. 

    “This is not a partnership,” the lawmakers said. “It is, as other university leaders have aptly described, political extortion.”

    Surovell, Lucas and Locke wield significant legislative power as the state Senate majority leader, president pro tempore and chair of the Senate Democratic Caucus, respectively. They underlined this influence in their letter, vowing “to ensure that the Commonwealth does not subsidize an institution that has ceded its independence to federal political control.”

    The three senators pointed specifically to the forced departure of former UVA President Jim Ryan, who abruptly resigned in June amid federal pressure to step down over the university’s diversity efforts during his seven-year tenure. 

    In his announcement, Ryan said he wouldn’t fight back against the Trump administration and attempt to keep his job because staying would cost UVA research funding and student aid and hurt its international students.

    Federal officials ousted Ryan, the state senators said, “not for any failure of leadership, but because they disagreed with the University’s approach to diversity and inclusion.” They categorized Ryan as a successful leader who was made into a political sacrifice — one that didn’t stave off further interference.

    “President Ryan’s resignation was meant to spare the University from federal retaliation, yet here we are again, facing even more aggressive demands on institutional autonomy,” they told UVA leaders. “The lesson is unmistakable — appeasing this Administration only emboldens further encroachment.”

    UVA faculty similarly called for institutional leaders to rebuke the compact. In a 60-2 vote, the university’s faculty senate approved a resolution on Oct. 3 whose preamble called the proposal dangerous to UVA and a likely violation of state and federal law.

    The Trump administration gave the nine universities until Oct. 20 to offer feedback on the compact and until Nov. 21 to sign the agreement.

    Source link

  • Newsom vows to pull state funding from California colleges that sign Trump’s compact

    Newsom vows to pull state funding from California colleges that sign Trump’s compact

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

    Dive Brief:

    • California Gov. Gavin Newsom on Thursday threatened to pull state funding from colleges that signed a proposed compact from the Trump administration seeking to impose sweeping policy changes in return for priority in research funding. 
    • “If any California university signs this radical agreement, they’ll lose billions in state funding,” Newsom said in a statement. “California will not bankroll schools that sell out their students, professors, researchers, and surrender academic freedom.”
    • First reported by the Wall Street Journal, federal officials offered the compact to the University of Southern California and eight other high-profile research universities this week.

    Dive Insight:

     Since taking office, President Donald Trump and his administration have waged a legal and financial campaign against colleges in an effort to transform them ideologically. It comes after Trump on the campaign trail described colleges as “dominated by Marxist maniacs and lunatics” and full of academics “obsessed with indoctrinating America’s youth.” 

    With the compact, the administration has gone from using mainly sticks — typically in the form of civil rights investigations and canceled research grants — to using carrots as a means of pushing institutions to make reforms.

    The Trump administration offered to prioritize colleges for research grants and other funding if they agree to give the government unprecedented control over internal institutional decisions and governance. 

    That includes:

    • Taking a position of institutional neutrality on events that don’t directly impact the college.
    • Committing not to consider race, gender, religion and other characteristics “explicitly or implicitly” in admissions. (The compact would grant exceptions for religious and single-sex institutions to limit admissions based on religious belief and gender, respectively.)
    • Conducting broad, public assessments of the viewpoints of employees and students.
    • Changing governance structures and potentially dissolving or taking over departments that “purposefully punish, belittle, and even spark violence against conservative ideas.”
    • Adopting policies that recognize “academic freedom is not absolute” and prevent “discriminatory, threatening, harassing, or other behaviors that abridge the rights of other members of the university community.”
    • Capping international undergraduate enrollment at 15% of the broader student body while screening out “students who demonstrate hostility to the United States, its allies, or its values.”
    • Freezing tuition for five years.
    • Requiring applicants to take standardized tests such as the SAT.
    • Committing to using “lawful force” and “swift, serious, and consistent sanctions” to handle protests that “delay or disrupt class instruction or disrupt libraries or other traditional study locations.”

    The compact would also require colleges with endowments worth $2 million or more per student to waive tuition for students studying hard sciences, though the memo didn’t define the field. 

    Along with USC, eight other colleges received the administration’s memo detailing the compact: the University of Arizona, Brown University, Dartmouth College, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, the University of Pennsylvania, the University of Texas, Vanderbilt University and the University of Virginia.

    The compact has drawn alarm and stern rebukes throughout the higher education world. 

    “College and university presidents cannot bargain with the essential freedom of colleges and universities to determine, on academic grounds, whom to admit and what is taught, how, and by whom,” the American Association of Colleges and Universities said in a statement Friday.

    Denise Forte, president and CEO of the policy analysis and advocacy organization EdTrust, described the compact in a statement as an “existential threat to all institutions of higher learning and the latest example of the federal government overexerting its power to intimidate colleges and universities viewed as ideological enemies.”

    In a joint statement Thursday, top leaders of the American Association of University Professors and the American Federation of Teachers described the compact as offering preferential treatment “in exchange for allegiance to a partisan ideological agenda” and said that it “stinks of favoritism, patronage, and bribery.” They urged all governing boards and administrators to reject the agreement.

    American Council on Education President Ted Mitchell in an interview with The New York Times described the compact as a power play “designed to divide the higher education community.” 

    And then there is Newsom, who has been among the most vocal Democrats opposing Trump, especially since the president sent the National Guard into Los Angeles this summer, a move that a judge later ruled illegal.

    In a press release, Newsom’s office described the compact as tying access to federal research funding to “radical conservative ideological restrictions on colleges and universities.” The governor also specifically threatened to “instantly” pull colleges’ eligibility for Cal Grants, a form of state aid for students from low- and middle-income families.

    USC on Friday confirmed it had received and was reviewing the administration’s letter, but the university did not offer further comment.

    Most of those institutions have remained quiet about their plans, if any, to sign or reject the agreement. A leader from one, however, voiced enthusiastic openness to the compact. 

    In a widely shared statement, Kevin Eltife, chair of the University of Texas Board of Regents, said that the system was “honored” that its flagship in Austin was selected among the nine to receive the compact. 

    “We enthusiastically look forward to engaging with university officials and reviewing the compact immediately,” said Eltife, a former Republican state senator.  

    Source link

  • Angelo State Allows Pride Flags, Keeps Anti-Trans Policies

    Angelo State Allows Pride Flags, Keeps Anti-Trans Policies

    Angelo State walked back some provisions of its new anti-LGBTQ+ policies.

    Michael Barera/Wikimedia Commons

    Directives related to a slate of convoluted and sometimes contradictory new policies prohibiting discussion of transgender topics and identity have left employees at Angelo State University frightened and confused.

    As of Monday, conversations and content about transgender identities are still prohibited, but employees are allowed to use students’ preferred names, display rainbow flags in their offices and on their cars, and talk about lesbian, gay, bisexual and queer identities, according to emails from department heads to faculty obtained by Inside Higher Ed.

    The changes were clarified to employees after a meeting between the deans, provost and ASU legal counsel. Employees are still seeking other clarifications. For example, students who are already working on papers related to transgender identity are allowed to continue doing so, but it’s unclear whether they could give a final class presentation on the topic. 

    Only some faculty members at some the university’s colleges have been told about these changes. Others are still responding to the initial policies handed down to employees Friday following a meeting with Angelo State leadership. The policies are stringent and exhaustive: no pride flags, no calling students by the singular “they” or using their preferred names (unless it aligns with their sex assigned at birth), no pronouns in email signatures and no mention of the fact that there are more genders than the two assigned at birth.

    None of the policies are formalized in writing, and that is purposeful, said Brian Evans, president of the Texas Conference of the American Association of University Professors. The guidance only changed after faculty brought up questions about the policies, which deans took back to the provost and university counsel. Final details about what is and is not allowed and how the rules will be enforced are still under discussion.

    Source link

  • Angelo State Reportedly Banning Pride Flags, Pronouns

    Angelo State Reportedly Banning Pride Flags, Pronouns

    News of the policies comes after a Texas bill was signed into a law that prohibits people from using bathrooms that differ from their sex assigned at birth in state buildings.

    Photo illustration by Justin Morrison/Inside Higher Ed | rustamank/iStock/Getty Images

    Employees at Angelo State University in Texas could be fired for displaying a pride flag or discussing any topic that suggests there are more gender identities than male and female.

    Spokespeople for Angelo State have not confirmed or denied details of the policies reportedly discussed at meetings Monday between faculty, staff and institutional leaders. But, local news magazine the Concho Observer reported that the policies would ban discussion of transgender topics or any topics that suggest there are more than two genders.

    The policies would also require instructors to remove information about transgender topics on syllabi and refer to students by their given names only, not any alternative names. Safe space stickers and LGBTQ+ flags would be banned and employees wouldn’t be allowed to include their pronouns in their email signatures.

    News of the policies comes just as Gov. Greg Abbott signed a bill on Monday that prohibits people from using the bathroom that differs from their sex assigned at birth in state buildings, including public universities, NBC reported. Institutions that violate this law face fines of up to $125,000.

    The Angelo State policies are the latest in a string of attacks on academic freedom at Texas public universities in recent weeks. Texas A&M University officials terminated a professor, demoted two other faculty members and, as of Thursday, accepted the president’s resignation in response to a viral video that showed a student challenging a professor in class for teaching about gender identity.

    Texas State University fired a newly tenured history professor over comments he made at a socialism conference about a hypothetical overthrow of the government by activists (he has already sued the university in response). And as of this month, faculty senates at some public universities are abolished.

    “What is happening at ASU is part of a larger assault on higher education and marginalized communities across Texas and the nation,” Brian Evans, president of the Texas Conference of the American Association of University Professors, said in a statement. “Moreover, it is an overt attempt to erase individuals of diverse backgrounds and experiences by limiting not only what can be taught but also what ideas students can explore. These policies and this extremist push to censor open inquiry, debate, and discovery is an affront to the U.S. and Texas Constitutions and an assault on the very foundations of our colleges and universities.”

    It is unclear exactly whom the new policies at Angelo State will apply to, and whether there are exceptions, particularly for displays and conversations held in private offices or for conversations outside of the classroom.

    Angelo State spokespeople did not answer any of the questions Inside Higher Ed asked about the new policies, and instead provided the following statement: “Angelo State University is a public institute of higher education and is therefore subject to both state and federal law, executive orders and directives from the President of the United States, and executive orders and directives from the Governor of Texas,” spokesperson Brittney Miller wrote. “As such, Angelo State fully complies with the letter of the law.”

    Miller also sent a link to a Jan. 30 letter from Abbott that said, “All Texas agencies must ensure that agency rules, internal policies, employment practices, and other actions comply with the law and the biological reality that there are only two sexes—male and female,” as well as President Donald Trump’s Jan. 20 executive order stating that the United States only recognizes two genders, male and female.

    What type of legal case faculty could bring in response—and whether they may have a case at all—will depend largely on the policy details, said Eugene Volokh, a professor of law emeritus at the University of California, Los Angeles, School of Law.

    There are no Texas state laws that explicitly prohibit faculty members from discussing LGBTQ+ topics in classrooms. Even Brian Harrison, the Texas state representative who is largely responsible for making the Texas A&M video go viral, said as much during an interview Sept. 13 on a conservative radio show.

    “The governor and lieutenant governor and speaker have been telling everybody for two years now that we passed bans on DEI and transgender indoctrination in public universities,” Harrison said. “The only little problem with that? It’s a complete lie. The bill that was passed to ban DEI explicitly authorizes DEI in the classroom—same thing with transgender indoctrination.” Harrison has introduced several bills to ban these topics, but so far none have been passed.

    The legislation Harrison referred to is Texas Senate Bill 17, which bans diversity, equity and inclusion efforts by public institutions. It was signed into law in 2023 and includes carve-outs for academic instruction, scholarly research and campus guest speakers. Meanwhile, House Bill 229 took effect on Sept. 1 and specifies that the state recognizes two genders. It applies to data collection by government entities only and does not restrict academic instruction or speech.

    Public employers, because they only speak through their employees, can generally tell people what to say as part of their job, Volokh said. “A police department may order police officers to talk in certain ways to their citizens and to not talk in other ways to citizens, right? In fact, we expect the police department to do that,” he said. “The question is whether there’s a specific, special rule that protects the rights of college or university professors.”

    The courts are largely undecided on that, he added. “It’s being litigated right now in other federal courts. It’s been raised in past cases, and there isn’t really a clear answer,” he said.

    “It’s certainly possible that [professors] may have First Amendment rights to choose to teach what they want to teach, but it’s also possible that boards will also say, ‘No, when you’re on the job and talking to a captive audience of students that the university provided for you … we, the university, get to tell you what to teach.’”

    Other state university systems have implemented similar policies with the opposite effect. For example, the University of California system requires university-issued documents to offer three gender identity options—male, female and nonbinary—and for all university documents and IT systems to include an individual’s “lived name” instead of their legal name. If an individual’s lived name is different from their legal name, their legal name must be kept confidential.

    This article has been updated to correct the Texas Senate bill number.

    Source link

  • Texas State Prof Sues, Claiming Free Speech, Contract Violations

    Texas State Prof Sues, Claiming Free Speech, Contract Violations

    Thomas Alter had received tenure as an associate history professor just 10 days before he was fired.

    Mikala Compton/Austin American-Statesman/Getty Images

    A tenured Texas State University professor who was terminated earlier this month after allegedly inciting violence during a speech has sued the university, CBS Austin reported. In the lawsuit filed in district court, Thomas Alter, the former associate professor of history, claims that university leadership violated his free speech and due process rights and breached his employment contract. 

    At a Sept. 7 conference organized by Socialist Horizon, Alter said in part that “without organization, how can anyone expect to overthrow the most bloodthirsty, profit-driven mad organization in the history of the world—that of the U.S. government.” His speech was recorded and circulated by a right-wing YouTuber who had infiltrated the event. Alter was terminated three days later.

    In a statement announcing his termination, Texas State president Kelly Damphousse said Alter’s “actions are incompatible with their responsibilities as a faculty member at Texas State University.” Alter told CBS Austin that he did not associate himself with Texas State during the conference. 

    “The reasons Provost Aswrath provided for Dr. Alter’s termination are false and give every appearance of politically-motivated discrimination,” the lawsuit states. “In truth, Dr. Alter was terminated because he espoused views that are politically unpopular in today’s politically-charged climate, in violation of his First Amendment right to free speech.”

    Alter told CBS Austin that his dismissal “turned my world upside down and my family’s world upside down.”

    “Anyone should be able to express their views no matter how unpopular they are without facing the repercussions that many people are seeing,” he added. (Alter had earned tenure just 10 days before he was removed, The Chronicle of Higher Education reported.)

    Texas State did not respond to Inside Higher Ed’s request for comment, but a spokesperson told CBS Austin the university declined to comment on pending litigation.

    Source link

  • The advantages of supplementing curriculum

    The advantages of supplementing curriculum

    Key points:

    Classroom teachers are handed a curriculum they must use when teaching. That specific curriculum is designed to bring uniformity, equity, and accountability into classrooms. It is meant to ensure that every child has access to instruction that is aligned with state standards. The specific curriculum provides a roadmap for instruction, but anyone who has spent time in a classroom knows that no single curriculum can fully meet the needs of every student.

    In other words, even the most carefully designed curriculum cannot anticipate the individual needs of every learner or the nuances of every classroom. This is why supplementing curriculum is a vital action that skilled educators engage in. Supplementing curriculum does not mean that teachers are not teaching the required curriculum. In fact, it means they are doing even more to ensure student success.

    Students arrive with different strengths, challenges, and interests. Supplementing curriculum allows teachers to bridge inevitable gaps within their students.  For example, a math unit may assume fluency with multiplying and dividing fractions, but some students may not recall that skill, while others are ready to compute with mixed numbers. With supplementary resources, a teacher can provide both targeted remediation and enrichment opportunities. Without supplementing the curriculum, one group may fall behind or the other may become disengaged.

    Supplementing curriculum can help make learning relevant. Many curricula are written to be broad and standardized. Students are more likely to connect with lessons when they see themselves reflected in the content, so switching a novel based on the population of students can assist in mastering the standard at hand.   

    Inclusion is another critical reason to supplement. No classroom is made up of one single type of learner. Students with disabilities may need graphic organizers or audio versions of texts. English learners may benefit from bilingual presentations of material or visual aids. A curriculum may hit all the standards of a grade, but cannot anticipate the varying needs of students. When a teacher intentionally supplements the curriculum, every child has a pathway to success.

    Lastly, supplementing empowers teachers. Teaching is not about delivering a script; it is a profession built on expertise and creativity. When teachers supplement the prescribed curriculum, they demonstrate professional judgment and enhance the mandated framework. This leads to a classroom where learning is accessible, engaging, and responsive.

    A provided curriculum is the structure of a car, but supplementary resources are the wheels that let the students move. When done intentionally, supplementing curriculum enables every student to be reached. In the end, the most successful classrooms are not those that follow a book, but those where teachers skillfully use supplementary curriculum to benefit all learners. Supplementing curriculum does not mean that a teacher is not using the curriculum–it simply means they are doing more to benefit their students even more.

    Latest posts by eSchool Media Contributors (see all)

    Source link

  • Kean U to receive $10M in state funding to support merger

    Kean U to receive $10M in state funding to support merger

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

    Dive Brief:

    • Kean University is set to receive an additional $10 million to support its acquisition of New Jersey City University, as part of New Jersey’s fiscal 2026 budget. 
    • Kean would have to return the money to the state if the merger is not completed as detailed in the two public universities’ May letter of intent. Kean and NJCU are expected to finalize their merger by June 2026, pending regulatory and accreditor approvals.
    • Further reshaping Kean finances, its board on Monday approved in-state tuition rates for all students beginning in 2026-27 — the first academic year the university is set to fully control NJCU post-merger.

    Dive Insight:

    Following years of financial challenges, NJCU found a lifeline in Kean after a state-appointed monitor ordered the university to find a financial partner.

    The $10 million state allocation — a small fraction of the $3.1 billion New Jersey is set to spend on higher education in fiscal 2026 — will go toward “feasibility studies, planning and legal work tied to the merger” between NJCU and Kean. But it’s unlikely to cover the full cost of the process.

    In 2020, a University System of Georgia regent estimated that just changing the name of an institution — updating everything from signage to stationery — cost over $3 million.

    Under Kean and NJCU’s letter of intent, the former would assume the latter’s assets and liabilities and NJCU’s campus would be renamed Kean Jersey City.

    As the two universities go through the merger process, Kean is also to receive state funding for over 1,100 NJCU jobs in the form of a loan, per the state’s budget. If the merger falls through, the funded positions will return to NJCU.

    A 2019 working paper found that, on average, a merger between two nonprofit colleges raised tuition prices by students between 5% and 7%.

    But Kean appears to be poised to buck that trend with its elimination of out-of-state tuition. Under the new plan, the university will drop out-of-state tuition for current and new undergraduate and graduate students.

    “Kean’s outstanding academics, proximity to New York City and growing research programs make the University appealing to students outside of New Jersey,” Michael Salvatore, Kean’s executive vice president for academic and administrative operations, said in a Tuesday statement. “This will enable us to tap into expanded markets while bringing students into the state.”

    In the 2025-26 academic year, full-time students from New Jersey paid $7,649.80 per semester in tuition and fees, while their out-of-state counterparts paid $12,008.58. In-state and out-of-state graduate students paid $1,019.54 and $1,206.64 per credit, respectively.

    Source link

  • Kent State professor’s ‘Twitter tirade’ — not bias — caused opportunities to be revoked, court finds

    Kent State professor’s ‘Twitter tirade’ — not bias — caused opportunities to be revoked, court finds

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

    Kent State University did not discriminate or retaliate when it decided to deny a transgender professor a previously offered course-load reallocation and a transfer to work on the main campus, the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals found Sept. 12, upholding a district court’s decision.

    In 2021, the professor had reached out and been in talks with the dean of the College of Arts and Sciences about leading a forthcoming Center for the Study of Gender and Sexuality. The dean had also proposed reallocating some of the professor’s teaching load so they could work on developing a new gender studies major. Additionally, the professor had asked for a transfer to the main campus from the regional campus where they had been working. 

    When the reallocation offer was revoked and two committees voted against the transfer request, the professor filed a lawsuit alleging sex discrimination and retaliation in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, along with other charges.

    The district and appeals courts, however, found that the professor had engaged in a “weeks-long, profanity-laden Twitter tirade” against their colleagues after learning a political science professor and head of the school where the center would be housed would be chairing committees overseeing the center and the gender studies major. 

    After witnessing several weeks of tweets calling the leadership transphobic, critiquing the “white cishet admin with zero content expertise,” referring to the field of political science as a “sentient trash heap,” and more, the College of Arts and Sciences dean revoked the offer to reallocate the professor’s teaching load so they could lead on developing the major, but still welcomed them to be on the committee.

    The social media messages “violated university policy against attacking colleagues or their academic fields,” and thus were “reasonable grounds … for disciplining or reprimanding an employee,” the court said. 

    Additionally, the transfer committees discussed the professor’s “withdrawal from university service, negative interactions with other faculty members, and the department’s needs,” the 6th Circuit said. “No one discussed [the professor’s] gender identity.”

    Source link

  • Black Student Found Hanging From Tree at Delta State

    Black Student Found Hanging From Tree at Delta State

    Demartravion “Trey” Reed was a 21-year-old student at the Mississippi institution.

    Andrew Caballero-Reynolds/AFP/Getty Images

    Delta State University has been rocked by the discovery of a Black student’s body hanging from a tree in the middle of campus on Monday.

    Demartravion “Trey” Reed was a 21-year-old student at the Mississippi institution. Recalling a long, painful history of lynchings, his death has spurred an outpouring of grief and anger across the country.

    The Bolivar County Coroner’s Office said on Monday that a preliminary examination of Reed’s body showed no evidence of foul play, including “any lacerations, contusions, compound fractures, broken bones or injuries consistent with an assault.”

    But Reed’s family members are calling for their own investigation, including an independent autopsy, and have demanded access to video footage that might reveal more details of his death.

    “From the beginning, the family has been seeking transparency in this investigation,” Vanessa J. Jones, an attorney representing the family, told Inside Higher Ed. “Especially after a tragic incident like this occurs, and you’re dealing with a state that has a past history which includes a painful history of racial violence … transparency is paramount.”

    The Reed family’s distrust in the handling of the student’s death was deepened when officials allowed his mother to view her son’s body from the neck up only, Jones said.

    Officers also shared conflicting details of Reed’s death when they first spoke to his family, Jones said. According to Jones, the Grenada County Sheriff’s Department went to Reed’s grandfather’s home on Monday and said Reed was found dead in his dorm room “from an apparent suicide.”

    Prominent civil rights attorney Ben Crump has taken on the family’s case and said in a post on X that he will lead a team of civil rights leaders and organizers in “pursuing transparency for Trey’s family.”

    “We cannot accept vague conclusions when so many questions remain,” he wrote. Crump described Reed as a “young man full of promise and warmth, deeply loved and respected by all who knew him.”

    Lawmakers are also demanding more information.

    “We’ll never have true justice for Trey, because that would mean he would still be with us—but there must be answers,” Massachusetts representative Ayanna Pressley wrote on X.

    Mississippi representative Bennie G. Thompson called for a federal investigation into Reed’s death.

    “It is always a tragedy when a young life is cut short,” Thompson said in a statement. “We must leave no stone unturned in the search for answers. While the details of this case are still emerging, we cannot ignore Mississippi’s painful history of lynching and racial violence against African Americans.”

    Updates From the University

    At a press conference Wednesday, Delta State University president Daniel J. Ennis said Reed’s loss was “devastating” and “the manner of how Trey was discovered has stirred many emotions in this community and many emotions around the state and the nation.”

    Ennis reiterated the coroner’s early conclusions but said he recognized the psychological impact of Reed’s death. “This is not only about facts,” Ennis said. “It’s about emotions and it’s about feelings and the way this loss and how it was discovered affects people’s lives.”

    Ennis, who is white, said he acknowledged his weakness in not being “adequate to speak to the imagery that this incident raises.”

    Delta State serves roughly 2,800 students, about 40 percent of whom are Black. Ennis said the campus has been receiving threatening phone calls and messages since Reed’s death.

    “I can say that my heartbreak is comprehensive, not just for Trey—although it is primarily for Trey—but for the fact that the rest of the world has an impression of Delta State that is so at odds with what I know to be this institution,” which is “the joy and the grace of people living and working together and respecting each other,” he said.

    Mike Peeler, Delta State University chief of police, told the press that Reed’s body was transported to the Mississippi State Medical Examiner’s Office for a full autopsy on Wednesday morning. Authorities expect preliminary autopsy results within 24 to 48 hours. He said DSU Police, the Cleveland Police Department, the Mississippi Bureau of Investigation and the Bolivar County Sheriff’s Office planned to update the public on the findings after first meeting with Reed’s next of kin.

    He told reporters law enforcement officials were reviewing relevant video, but he couldn’t offer any more details. Peeler also said he had no information about Reed’s family being told his death took place in his dorm room.

    He emphasized during the press conference that “this is an isolated incident” and “there are currently no active threats to the campus,” which “remains a safe environment for students, faculty and staff.”

    ‘Heartbroken’ Students

    Nonetheless, the grisly incident has frightened Black students on campus.

    “Hearing that happened to another Black student, it really makes me feel unsafe,” a Delta State student, Stacie Hoskins, told WAPT16.

    The nature of Reed’s death has had an emotional impact on Black students on other campuses as well; some treated it as a foregone conclusion that Reed was killed and issued statements of support to fellow students.

    The Black Student Union at Illinois State University directed students to campus counseling resources, and its executive board said it was “heartbroken by the tragic loss of Trey Reed, whose life was cut short by a horrific act of violence.”

    North Carolina A&T University’s NAACP chapter posted on Instagram that Reed “could have been any of us. Any Black student. Any campus.”

    “Our education is under attack. Our sanity is under attack. Our very existence is under attack,” the chapter said. “We refuse to stay silent. Black lives matter. Black students matter. Always.”



    Source link

  • Texas State Fires Professor Accused of Inciting Violence

    Texas State Fires Professor Accused of Inciting Violence

    Alter at Texas State is the second Texas professor fired this week.

    Mikala Compton/Austin American-Statesman/Getty Images

    Texas State University fired a professor Wednesday after he was accused of inciting violence during a speech at a socialist conference, The Texas Tribune reported. 

    In a video posted on X, associate professor of history Thomas Alter can be seen giving a speech over Zoom to attendees of the Revolutionary Socialism Conference. “Without organization, how can anyone expect to overthrow the most bloodthirsty, profit-driven mad organization in the history of the world—that of the U.S. government,” he said in the clip, which was circulated online by a YouTuber who infiltrated and recorded the event.

    Texas State president Kelly Damphousse said in a statement Wednesday that the university reviewed the comments, which he said “amounted to serious professional and personal misconduct.”

    “As a result, I have determined that his actions are incompatible with their responsibilities as a faculty member at Texas State University,” he added. “Effective immediately, his employment with Texas State University has been terminated.”

    The video clip shared on social media was spliced and cut together. In the full version of his speech, which is posted on YouTube, Alter discusses the various tactics of different socialist groups. 

    “Another strain of anarchism gaining ground recently is that of insurrectionary anarchism,” Alter said in his speech. “Primarily coming out of those that were involved in the Cop City protest. These groups, individuals have grown rightfully frustrated with symbolic protests that do not disrupt the normal functioning of government and business. They call for more direct action and shutting down the military-industrial complex and preventing ICE from kidnapping members of their communities. Many insurrectionary anarchists are serving jail time, lost jobs and face expulsion from school. They have truly put their bodies on the line. While their actions are laudable, it should be asked, what purpose do they serve? As anarchists, these insurrectionists explicitly reject the formation of a revolutionary party capable of leading the working class to power. Without organization, how can anyone expect to overthrow the most bloodthirsty, profit-driven mad organization in the history of the world—that of the U.S. government.”

    Alter didn’t respond to a request for comment from Inside Higher Ed.

    He is the second Texas professor to be fired from their post this week. On Tuesday, Texas A&M officials fired Melissa McCoul, a senior lecturer, and removed two faculty members from their administrative roles after a student complained that the material McCoul taught in a summer course violated President Donald Trump’s executive orders.

    Source link