糖心Vlog

Trump assassination posts test boundaries of academic freedom

Many scholars were criticised for their comments after the Pennsylvania shooting but should those involved be losing their jobs?

Published on
July 24, 2024
Last updated
July 24, 2024
Someone in a crowd holds up a sign saying 'Trump - not my president'
Source: iStock/vivalapenler

As the news broke about a gunman鈥檚 13 July attempt to kill former president Donald Trump during a Pennsylvania rally, John James, an English instructor at Bellarmine University in Louisville, posted on Instagram above one of the latest headlines: 鈥淚f you鈥檙e gonna shoot, man, don鈥檛 miss.鈥

Dr James took down his post the next day, he said, and later deactivated his Instagram account. But Libs of TikTok, an X account that often personally targets liberals, had already broadcast a screenshot of his post to its millions of followers and hateful messages began pouring in to him and university employees.

The university said it received a bomb threat on 15 July connected to anger聽about the post, although police eventually determined the threat wasn鈥檛 credible. Bellarmine fired Dr James the next day, three days after the shooting, he said. 鈥淚 wasn鈥檛 given an opportunity to clarify my statement, to apologise or anything,鈥 he said.

These are the types of faculty member statements that test the boundaries of traditional academic freedom protections. They often crop up at times of intense controversy such as this. And Dr James wasn鈥檛 the only academic to post something about the assassination attempt that attracted social media and media attention.

糖心Vlog

ADVERTISEMENT

Also on the day of the shooting, Uju Anya, a tenured associate professor of second-language acquisition at Carnegie Mellon University, posted on X that 鈥淚t was staged鈥. That might offend some as well. But things appear to have gone differently for her.

Dr Anya, who didn鈥檛 return聽Inside Higher Ed鈥檚 requests for comment, hasn鈥檛 taken down her post. A Carnegie Mellon spokesperson provided only a brief statement on the issue: 鈥淔ree expression is core to our democracy and to the mission of higher education. Faculty commentary on personal social media accounts do not represent our institutional views.鈥 (Dr Anya is the same professor who attracted controversy when she posted, as Queen Elizabeth of the UK was dying in 2022, 鈥淚 heard the chief monarch of a thieving and raping genocidal empire is finally dying. May her pain be excruciating.鈥)

糖心Vlog

ADVERTISEMENT

Across the Canadian border,聽聽on a conversation two professors had with each other on X. According to that public broadcaster, University of Guelph professor Shoshanah Jacobs posted a video of the shooting鈥檚 aftermath alongside the words 鈥淲hen 4 inches really matters鈥, and University of British Columbia professor of teaching Karen Pinder replied, 鈥淒amn, so close. Too bad.鈥

Neither professor responded to聽Inside Higher Ed鈥檚 requests for comment, but their universities said they were investigating. A University of British Columbia spokesperson said in an email that the university was 鈥渁ware of Dr Pinder鈥檚 post and is looking into the matter鈥, that the university聽did not 鈥渃ondone violence鈥 and privacy laws prevented commenting further. A University of Guelph statement said it was 鈥渁ware of comments posted to social media鈥 by a professor it didn鈥檛 name and it聽was 鈥渃urrently looking into the matter鈥.

Back in the US, there were murkier cases. As it did with Dr James at Bellarmine, Libs of TikTok posted allegations last week that Louise Kelly, an associate professor of exercise science at California Lutheran University, had posted online, 鈥淚 hope next time they don鈥檛 miss and I really hope this isn鈥檛 the last attempt too鈥 would love to do it myself if I wasn鈥檛 so far away.鈥 Libs of TikTok tagged the Secret Service in its post.

In this case, however, Cal Lutheran has said that Dr Kelly聽did not actually write that and the Simi Valley Police Department was investigating who was behind the allegedly fraudulent post. Mark Berry, a Cal Lutheran spokesperson, said the university took Dr Kelly鈥檚 profile page off聽its website to protect her from threats and insults and said, 鈥淧rofessor Kelly isn鈥檛 doing interviews.鈥

In Alabama, a conservative site called聽聽that Jennifer L. Collins, whose Facebook account listed her as an adjunct professor at the University of Alabama, had posted on Facebook, 鈥淪omeone is a really lousy shot because they not only missed his large ass but they missed AAALLLL those people behind him too. Weird, huh?鈥

The alleged post by Dr Collins seemed to suggest that she also thought the assassination attempt was staged, but she ended it by quoting the refrain from a song from the musical聽Chicago, sung by female murderers. The refrain includes the words 鈥淗e had it coming/He only had himself to blame.鈥

The news outlet reported that a University of Alabama spokesperson, Alex House, said Dr Collins was no longer employed at the institution but didn鈥檛 say why or when she stopped working there. Ms House told聽Inside Higher Ed聽via email that Dr Collins 鈥渉as not been employed by the university since May 2024鈥, before the assassination attempt and Dr Collins鈥檚 alleged post about it. Dr Collins聽did not聽reply to聽emails sent to her at another job where 1819 News reported she works.

All these statements about the assassination attempt 鈥 whether faculty members actually made them or not 鈥 revive once more the ancient academic freedom debate: when faculty members speak outside of their classrooms or scholarships on political issues, when does their speech cross a line that should involve punishment?

糖心Vlog

ADVERTISEMENT

Extramural activities

The American Association of University Professors鈥 (AAUP) 1940 鈥淪tatement of Principles on Academic Freedom and Tenure鈥, which it wrote in partnership with the American Association聽of聽Colleges and Universities, has been emulated by universities across the country. But it doesn鈥檛 provide much clarity on where the line should be. It includes multiple caveats.

It says that when faculty members 鈥渟peak or write as citizens, they should be free from institutional censorship or discipline鈥. That seems clear enough, and these faculty members seem to have been speaking or writing as citizens.

糖心Vlog

ADVERTISEMENT

But there鈥檚 a caveat: 鈥淭heir special position in the community imposes special obligations,鈥 AAUP says. At the same time, 鈥渢hey should remember that the public may judge their profession and their institution by their utterances. Hence they should at all times be accurate, should exercise appropriate restraint, should show respect for the opinions of others, and should make every effort to indicate that they are not speaking for the institution.鈥

Were those who posted about the attempted assassination exercising 鈥渁ppropriate restraint鈥? Is suggesting the shooting was staged without providing convincing evidence accurate?

That section of the 1940 statement is further qualified by a 1970 footnote that itself quotes from the 1964 鈥淐ommittee A Statement on Extramural Utterances鈥. That statement says, 鈥淭he controlling principle is that a faculty member鈥檚 expression of opinion as a citizen cannot constitute grounds for dismissal unless it clearly demonstrates the faculty member鈥檚 unfitness for his or her position. Extramural utterances rarely bear upon the faculty member鈥檚 fitness for the position. Moreover, a final decision should take into account the faculty member鈥檚 entire record as a teacher and scholar.鈥

Do controversial statements about the assassination attempt demonstrate unfitness?

Regardless of the answers to these questions, the AAUP argues that, if a university administration believes that a faculty member鈥檚 鈥渆xpression of opinion鈥 has made them 鈥渦nfit鈥, it should make that case in a hearing before a faculty committee, and the administration should bear the burden of proof. Greg Scholtz, a senior programme officer in the AAUP鈥檚 Department of Academic Freedom, Tenure and Governance, noted that those principles weren鈥檛 followed in Dr James鈥檚 situation at Bellarmine.

鈥淎 faculty member should not be dismissed unless the administration can demonstrate that they鈥檙e either incompetent as a teacher or incompetent as a scholar or have engaged in serious misconduct as a teacher or serious misconduct as a scholar,鈥 Dr Scholtz said. He said a dismissal should have 鈥渘othing to do with stuff that鈥檚 not relevant to your teaching and scholarship鈥.

At public universities, faculty members are protected by the First Amendment. Many private universities have copied similar protections into the written rights they promise their faculties. Robert Shibley, special counsel for campus advocacy at the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression, a pro鈥揻ree speech group, said, 鈥淚t鈥檚 a rare private university that hasn鈥檛 adopted some form of the principles AAUP discusses.鈥

Mr Shibley said that, for employees in and outside higher education, 鈥淔IRE鈥檚 position is that we should have a culture where even if you can be fired for things that don鈥檛 affect your job, it would be better if you weren鈥檛.鈥 But he also argued that free speech protections聽were particularly important for faculty members.

鈥淚t鈥檚 a greater threat to their ability to perform their job聽when you censor a professor than when you censor, say, a farmer,鈥 Mr Shibley said. 鈥淭he general job of farming is not necessarily to engage in the spread of knowledge and the exploration of new ideas, but that is vital to the job of being a professor in a university. You need to be able to experiment with new ideas and you need to have the ability to sometimes say things that will turn out to be wrong.鈥 Further, he said, 鈥渢he only reason we can have certainty that something is true is if the people who think it鈥檚 not true are free to make those arguments鈥.

Dr James said he was deluged by 鈥渄isgusting, death-threat kinds of messages鈥 after his post. 鈥淭hese people were very directed in what they were trying to do, and they knew precisely what they were going to accomplish from the outset,鈥 he said. He criticised his university for giving in to the pressure and said his targeting by Libs of TikTok was聽part of a trend of faculty members being subjected to a kind of 鈥淢cCarthyist blacklisting campaign鈥.

As for his post, Dr James said, 鈥淚 apologise for any hurt it might have caused people鈥 and 鈥淚 didn鈥檛 mean at all to condone violence鈥. He said he meant to suggest that a failed assassination attempt only empowers a candidate and heroises them. 鈥淚鈥檓 not saying it鈥檚 a good idea to assassinate anybody,鈥 he said.

Over at Carnegie Mellon this week, Dr Anya鈥檚 pinned post on her X account continued to be defiant. 鈥淗ello, my enemies! Don鈥檛 know if you heard, but I earned tenure EARLY鈥ay my success continue to agonize you.鈥

糖心Vlog

ADVERTISEMENT

This is an edited version of a story that first appeared on

Register to continue

Why register?

  • Registration is free and only takes a moment
  • Once registered, you can read 3 articles a month
  • Sign up for our newsletter
Please
or
to read this article.

Related articles

Elon Musk鈥檚 鈥榙e facto town square鈥 is a place where misinformation abounds and where academia is often attacked by culture warriors. But is fighting back effective? Or can it make things worse if academics don鈥檛 keep calm and stick to the facts? Tom Williams reports 

8 December

Reader's comments (1)

Silly academics sounding off on social media should not be able to claim the protection of the very special guild privilege of academic freedom - that is for academics acting within their subject expertise in a professional way.

Sponsored

Featured jobs

See all jobs
ADVERTISEMENT