The Volokh Conspiracy
Mostly law professors | Sometimes contrarian | Often libertarian | Always independent
"Targeting Students for Disparate Treatment Based on Protected Class Is Not Protected by Academic Freedom"
From the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (Joe Cohn):
Earlier this week, Stanford University suspended an instructor while the institution investigates allegations Jewish and Israeli students were targeted for discriminatory treatment in a required, first-year "Civic, Liberal and Global Education" course. Discriminating against students based on a protected characteristic such as race, gender, or national origin, violates federal law.
Academic freedom protects an exceptionally wide range of pedagogically relevant classroom speech by faculty. But the alleged conduct in this case, taken together, appears to cross the line. According to several news reports, in impromptu discussions of the Israeli war with Hamas during two classes, the instructor allegedly:
- asked Jewish and Israeli students to raise their hands;
- separated the Jewish and Israeli students from their peers, who he said represented the "colonized," by ordering the Jewish and Israeli students to stand in the corner;
- labeled the Jewish and Israeli students "colonizers;" and
- argued that Israel is a colonizer that has killed more people than were killed during the Holocaust.
- There are also conflicting reports about how the instructor may have taken, or otherwise separated, one or more students from their belongings before they were sent to the corner.
Academic freedom protects instructors' rights to make the argument that Israel is a colonizer responsible for many deaths, just as it protects all other arguments germane to the subject of a course. But academic freedom does not allow the singling out of students for adverse treatment on the basis of protected class status. FIRE has long argued that while "airing a view is not the same thing as acting on it," universities must act to prohibit discriminatory conduct by faculty.
Like any other instructor facing misconduct allegations, Stanford must provide the instructor robust due process protections to ensure basic fairness in any disciplinary proceeding.
Sounds correct to me, as I noted in yesterday's post.
Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
At this point he is "suspended" and not fired. I am guessing if you swap out black people for Jews in his stunt, he would have been fired in a nano second.
This instructor's actions fall far outside of the broad prerogatives granted under the rubrics of academic freedom and clearly fall into the category of harassment of individual students based on their religion or cultural heritage. Such behavior has no place in academia or the workplace. The fellow deserves being suspended.
How do you feel about an instructor using a series of racial slurs in the classroom?
Consider the proprietor's feelings before answering.
There is a very big difference between EV accurately quoting from a court's ruling and telling all of the Black students in his class to go stand in the corner. If you can't clearly understand this distinction, you are either obtuse, insane, or both.
He knows that. That's why he used the dishonest word "using," to obfuscate that difference. Another left-wing liar.
Stanford is lost, Don Nico.
If you swapped out "Ameer Hasan Loggins" for "Ariel Moshe Loggins" (or "Kenneth Clark Loggins", for that matter) you can bet the guy would be fired, twice-pilloried, and have a bunch of silly "leftists" hassling his family members across social media.
According to The Forward, the instructor is a Teaching Assistant.
A Teaching Assistant is a graduate student who is teaching under the supervision of an actual Professor. A TA (which law schools do not have) includes a full tuition/fee waiver along with a cash stipend and (increasingly) employee benefits.
(1) Will this graduate student also be expelled from school?
(2) Will the supervising professor face any consequences?
My guess is that they simply will take the TA out of the classroom and call it done -- continuing to both pay him/her/it and providing the benefits.
Off topic: what we're listening to
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u_E7hwHFVDk&list=OLAK5uy_n80SxBVXHv-9BHvdsH7iLYEpc84Zl-Ojs&index=28
Music by Carl Loewe (a contemporary of Schubert); words by Goethe.
The sorcerer's apprentice
English translation © Richard Stokes
The old sorcerer
Has finally gone away!
Now the spirits he controls
Shall obey my commands.
I've noted his method,
What he says and does,
And with strength of spirit,
I shall work wonders too.
Wander! Wander
On and on,
So that water
Might flow,
And gush abundantly
And fill the bath.
So come along, you old broomstick!
Dress yourself in rotten rags!
You've long been a servant;
Obey my orders now!
Stand up on two legs,
Let's give you a head on top,
Make haste now and off you go
With the water-jug!
Wander! Wander
On and on,
So that water
Might flow,
And gush abundantly
And fill the bath.
Look, he's running down to the bank;
In truth! He's already reached the river,
And back he comes as quick as lightning
And swiftly pours it all out.
Here he comes a second time!
Look how the tub is filling!
Look how every basin
Fills to overflowing!
Stand still, stand still!
Because we
Have had our fill
Of all your gifts! -
Alas! Alas! I realise now;
I've forgotten the magic word!
The word, alas, that turns him back
Into what he once was.
Alas! speedily he runs and fetches!
If only you were a broom as before!
He keeps rushing in
With more and more water,
Alas! a hundred rivers
Pour down on my head!
No, I won't permit it
A moment longer;
I shall seize him.
Oh, the spiteful brute!
Ah, now I'm getting really scared!
What a face! And what a look!
O, you creature from hell!
Shall the entire house be drowned?
I can see streams of water
Pouring through every door.
A despicable broom
Not to listen!
You who were once a stick -
Will you once again stand still!
Will you never
Ever stop?
I'll catch you,
I'll hold you,
And swiftly split this old wood
With this sharp hatchet.
Look, once more he comes, dragging pails!
Wait till I get to grips with you,
Then, O goblin, I'll knock you flat;
The smooth blade crashes down on him.
A fine blow, in truth!
Look - he's split in two.
There's hope for me now,
I can breathe freely again!
Alas! alas!
Both halves
Stand up at once,
A pair of servants,
Ready for action!
Ah, help me, you powers on high!
And off they run! Hall and steps
Get wetter and wetter.
What a ghastly inundation!
Lord and master, hear my cries! -
Ah, my master comes at last!
Sir, I'm in desperate straits!
The spirits I summoned -
I can't get rid of them.
'Into the corner,
Brooms! Brooms -
Have done!
Only your old master
Can call you forth
As spirits.'
Der Zauberlehrling
Hat der alte Hexenmeister
Sich doch einmal wegbegeben!
Und nun sollen seine Geister
Auch nach meinem Willen leben.
Seine Wort' und Werke
Merk ich, und den Brauch,
Und mit Geistesstärke
Thu' ich Wunder auch.
Walle! walle
Manche Strecke,
Daß, zum Zwecke,
Wasser fließe,
Und mit reichem vollem Schwalle
Zu dem Bade sich ergieße.
Und nun komm, du alter Besen!
Nimm die schlechten Lumpenhüllen;
Bist schon lange Knecht gewesen;
Nun erfülle meinen Willen!
Auf zwei Beinen stehe,
Oben sei ein Kopf,
Eile nun und gehe
Mit dem Wassertopf!
Walle! walle
Manche Strecke,
Daß, zum Zwecke,
Wasser fließe,
Und mit reichem vollem Schwalle
Zu dem Bade sich ergieße.
Seht, er läuft zum Ufer nieder!
Wahrlich! ist schon an dem Flusse,
Und mit Blitzesschnelle wieder
Ist er hier mit raschem Gusse.
Schon zum zweitenmale!
Wie das Becken schwillt!
Wie sich jede Schale
Voll mit Wasser füllt!
Stehe! stehe!
Denn wir haben
Deiner Gaben
Vollgemessen! --
Ach! ich merk' es! Wehe! wehe!
Hab' ich doch das Wort vergessen!
Ach das Wort, worauf am Ende
Er das wird, was er gewesen.
Ach, er läuft und bringt behende!
Wärst du doch der alte Besen!
Immer neue Güsse
Bringt er schnell herein.
Ach! und hundert Flüsse
Stürzen auf mich ein.
Nein, nicht länger
Kann ich's lassen,
Will ihn fassen.
Das ist Tücke!
Ach! nun wird mir immer bänger!
Welche Miene! welche Blicke!
O, du Ausgeburt der Hölle!
Soll das ganze Haus ersaufen?
Seh' ich über jede Schwelle
Doch schon Wasserströme laufen,
Ein verruchter Besen
Der nicht hören will.
Stock, der du gewesen,
Steh doch einmal still!
Willst's am Ende
Gar nicht lassen?
Will dich fassen,
Will dich halten,
Und das alte Holz behende
Mit dem scharfen Beile spalten.
Seht, da kommt er schleppend wieder!
Wie ich mich nun auf dich werfe,
Gleich, o Kobold, liegst du nieder;
Krachend trifft die glatte Schärfe.
Wahrlich! brav getroffen!
Seht, er ist entzwei!
Und nun kann ich hoffen,
Und ich athme frei!
Wehe! Wehe!
Beide Theile
Stehn in Eile
Schon als Knechte
Völlig fertig in die Höhe!
Helft mir, ach! ihr hohen Mächte!
Und sie laufen! Naß und nässer
Wird's im Saal und auf den Stufen.
Welch entsetzliches Gewässer!
Herr und Meister! hör mich rufen! --
Ach, da kommt der Meister!
Herr, die Noth ist groß!
Die ich rief, als Geister,
Werd' ich nun nicht los.
"In die Ecke,
Besen, Besen!
Seid's gewesen.
Denn als Geister
Ruft euch nur, zu seinem Zwecke,
Erst hervor der alte Meister."
whocare
Walt Disney.
The great DFD!
But the lied itself is not a patch on Der Erlkönig or Der Doppelgänger
I note the word "schleppend " - cognate with "shlep". 🙂
That's the Puritan concept of the consequences of making a deal with the Devil.
This is such an obvious abuse of power. How could these students then trust this instructor to provide unbiased grades?
If the instructor had continued teaching without being suspended, I don't see how these students would have had any reasonable alternative but to drop the class.
How could these students then trust this instructor to provide unbiased grades?
I suspect some instructors have no intention of providing unbiased grades
Sad, but true.
Some people think their duties are actually perks. Like a community college instructor who gives extra credit if you wash his or her car.
Or, rumor has it, a certain Senator from New Jersey who has an affinity for gold bars and sewing cash into his clothing.
Sadly, it's more than a few.
WAY more than a few...
"argued that Israel is a colonizer that has killed more people than were killed during the Holocaust."
If this was really said, it may also be so grossly out of bounds of pedagogical norms as to also lose academic freedom protection.
Based on what I've read, I don't think he quite said that. He said that Israelis (presumably, only Israeli Jews) are colonizers, and that colonizers as a class have killed more people than the Nazis killed during the Holocaust. Not that Israelis themselves have.
"in a REQUIRED, first-year ... course." (emphasis added).
"Academic freedom protects instructors' rights to make the argument that Israel is a colonizer responsible for many deaths, just as it protects all other arguments germane to the subject of a course. But academic freedom does not allow the singling out of students for adverse treatment on the basis of protected class status."
In other words, as long as you don't single out specific students, it's OK to force them to listen to statements about their evil ethnicity and to be graded by the person making those statements.
And the higher ed world wonders why the populace is turning against it.
Were there no required courses in your day, grandpa?
I'm loving watching the cognitive dissonance with idiot liberal Jews and their supposed "allies" on the left.
This is over the line, but a stream of racial slurs is an entirely different case?
Faux libertarians (who also are hypocrites when it comes to viewpoint-driven censorship) are among my favorite culture war casualties.
Carry on, clingers. Well, so far as better Americans permit our vestigial right-wing bigots to do anything as America continues to improve.
Kirkland, when A sues B because B called A a "nigger", and the court awarding A a chunk of change because B did so, the word "nigger" becomes an important part of the court's ruling -- and when an instructor is teaching this decision, said instructor has to say that the word B used was "nigger" and not "nimrod" nor "needlebrain" nor "neanderthal."
What the slur was does actually matter....
Amy Wax and the Volokh Conspiracy like the way you think.
You really are that stupid, aren't you?
The relevant comparison for Prof. Volokh would be a history class where the instructor described National Socialist propaganda, not to endorse the propaganda but to explain the influence it had.
In fact, the relevant comparison would be any history class whatsoever, because students are required to read accounts, not only of racist propaganda, but of mass murder and torture, as well.
Or perhaps a criminal-law class where the students have to study the gory and shocking facts in all sorts of homicide cases.
Perhaps you could explain why theses distinctions don’t make much difference, or how Professor Volokh has in fact attacked black students because they’re black. But you're such a Superior Man that you're above the plebian necessity of defending your positions with logical arguments.
I don't understand why the Jewish students went along with this farce.
They didn't want to be flunked out of the course, I'd assume.
I don't understand why they didn't video the whole thing.
California is a 2 party recording state and it would have been criminal for them to do so without permission of the instructor. This was an issue in the "fistgate" scandal a couple decades back in Massachusetts.
Besides, look at Milgram's Authority Experiments -- they probably went along with it, only later realizing how outrageous it was.
Dr. Ed is playing lawyer again. California is a two party state, but the ban is on recording a confidential communication. Speech to a class in a public classroom is not a confidential communication as that term is statutorily defined.
Ed is neither an attorney nor a CALIFORNIA attorney, but reading websites of actual CALIFORNIA attorneys, it appears that Nimrod is again WRONG. Something about a CA Supreme Court decision and such.
Here is the best summary on CA law I found — and remember that classrooms are NOT considered “public venues.” Think practically for a minute, how could an art class have a nude model without running afoul of the public indecency laws if they were?
https://recordinglaw.com/party-two-party-consent-states/california-recording-laws/
For a practical example of this, go back 20 years to the Fistgate incident and the decision not to prosecute was political.
NB: This is only about audio -- video was so primitive in the 1970s that it was ever considered.
What. A. Dick.
I guess I don't understand all the hand wringing about academic freedom. Fire the SOB for cause like any moral private business would do.