Tag: WVU

  • WVU cracks down on dangerous idea: free books

    WVU cracks down on dangerous idea: free books

    Passing out copies of a book on a college campus should not prompt a formal investigation. But that’s exactly what happened to freshman Eliyahu Itkowitz at West Virginia University. His experience illustrates how easily students and staff can weaponize a university’s investigative process to silence views they dislike. 

    In December 2024, Itkowitz was handing out copies on campus of Alan Dershowitz’s book, “The Ten Big Anti-Israel Lies: And How to Refute Them with Truth.” But after he gave one to a Muslim dining hall employee, she reported him to campus police and the university’s Division of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion. His crime? Giving her an “anti-Muslim book.” The employee also requested that Itkowitz be banned from the dining hall. (The employee’s request to ban Itkowitz was not granted, probably because handing out books is not misconduct.) 

    The employee said she recognized Itkowitz from the Muslim Student Association’s social media posts in October, warning students to stay away from Itkowitz after he expressed disagreement with the anti-Israel slogans MSA members had painted on protest signs.

    The next time Itkowitz visited the dining hall, that employee falsely claimed to her manager that Itkowitz had been banned for anti-Muslim speech. The employee then called campus police while her manager told Itkowitz he had to leave. Itkowitz objected and started recording the encounter, before eventually sitting down to eat with his friends. 

    In her reports to police and DDEI, the employee claimed that Itkowitz engaged in “racially inappropriate” speech, calling her “anti-Jewish” and telling her to “do [her] fucking job.” Itkowitz denies making any of these comments, none of the witnesses present heard any of the alleged comments or saw Itkowitz interact with the employee at all, and the video footage of the encounter does not support the employee’s claims. 

    The employee added that he had also called her a “terrorist” months earlier. He denies this too.

    Nevertheless, WVU issued a no-contact order prohibiting any interaction between the two and launched an investigation into Itkowitz for religious discrimination and harassment. After completing that investigation, WVU eventually dropped the case against Itkowitz last month. 

    But the investigation never should have happened in the first place. 

    Even if the university found that every single one of the dining hall employee’s allegations were 100% true — and there are good reasons to doubt her account of events — the alleged conduct falls well short of the legal standard for discriminatory harassment. Quite simply, even if the allegations are true, the conduct would nevertheless be protected by the First Amendment.   

    As we explained in a letter to WVU sent today, even if a school changes course later, launching an investigation and slapping students with a no-contact order based on protected expression is guaranteed to chill speech by making students think twice before speaking up in the future. Instead, universities that receive such complaints should first conduct internal reviews, and if they confirm the allegations concern wholly protected expression, close the matter without notifying the speaker — thereby avoiding a chilling effect — while offering support to the complainant. 

    Otherwise, WVU is allowing students and staff with ideological disagreements to use its complaint process as a cudgel to silence opponents. Itkowitz’s case was not the first. In fall 2023, WVU launched a 10-month investigation into a student for counterprotesting at pro-Palestinian demonstrations based on a complaint from the Muslim Students Association that similarly alleged wholly protected speech. 

    Universities must not allow weaponization of DEI investigations to inhibit the free exchange of ideas.

    A university campus that investigates students every time someone is offended cannot function as a home for rational dialogue and debate. Administrators must accept that students will sometimes be offended when confronted with views different from their own. At the very least, handing out books on a university campus should never be cause for investigation. 

    Source link

  • FIRE Defends WVU Football Players’ Right to Dance on TikTok

    FIRE Defends WVU Football Players’ Right to Dance on TikTok

    West Virginia University’s football team is experiencing a digital Footloose: The coach has prohibited the players from dancing on TikTok. The Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression hopes to reverse the ban.

    In March, head football coach Rich Rodriguez told his players that while they could post on TikTok, they weren’t allowed to dance on the platform.

    “We have to have a hard edge … and you’re in there in your tights dancing on TikTok ain’t quite the image of our program that I want,” Rodriguez said, according to the Associated Press.

    @wvu_football ♬ original sound – WV football

    Rodriguez also said he wants the players to focus less on their individual performances and more on the team dynamic—and he believes not dancing on TikTok can help.

    FIRE responded by writing a letter last month to the university’s athletic director, Wren Baker, arguing that the ban on dancing violates the athletes’ First Amendment right to free expression.

    “WVU players don’t hand in their expressive rights when Rodriguez hands out shoulder pads at the start of training camp,” FIRE wrote in the letter. “Because student-athletes are students first, their right to free expression off the field must be commensurate to other students on campus.”

    When Baker failed to respond within a few weeks, FIRE sent another letter, which was posted on X.

    “Major NFL players like Tom Brady, Gronk [Rob Gronkowski], and the Kelce brothers maintain robust TikTok presences,” the letter read. “Coaches at public colleges can’t stop their players from posting online, because students—including athletes—have the First Amendment right to express themselves.”

    The policy isn’t written anywhere, as Front Office Sports learned after requesting a copy through the Freedom of Information Act, but FIRE claims “its existence and enforcement violates students’ expressive rights.”

    Some college athletes use their social media presences to generate revenue through name, image and likeness opportunities, and many of the top earners through NIL deals are colleges football players, though fewer of their brand opportunities are a result of social media dances.  

    An impending ban on TikTok makes the future of students in general posting on the platform less clear.



    Source link