Skip to comments.Wisconsin Supreme Court sides with Marquette professor John McAdams in free speech case. (shortened)
Posted on 07/06/2018 8:09:04 AM PDT by UB355
The Wisconsin Supreme Court ruled Friday that embattled Marquette University political science professor John McAdams was improperly suspended after he publicly criticized a graduate student by name on his politically conservative blog, leading to threats against her.
The court ordered the Jesuit university to immediately reinstate the professor and sent the case back to a Milwaukee County Circuit Court judge to award damages, including back pay.
(Excerpt) Read more at jsonline.com ...
The Jesuits have descended into an unspeakable cabal of homosexuals and boy molesters. Their “universities” should not be taken seriously and are not Catholic institutions.
Good. Makes me sick what that place has degraded to.
Important win for the professor.
On December 12, 2014, McAdams was placed on indefinite academic leave from Marquette University and was suspended from all teaching and faculty duties, banned from campus but retaining pay and benefits. This indefinite suspension came about after McAdams publicly called out a graduate student and instructor by name, in a post on his private blog. He said the instructor had refused to allow a student in an ethics class to talk about gay marriage in class. A letter from Marquette University indicated that the firing was the result of his thrice violating student privacy and deliberately publishing students' names and information to target them for harassment, and because he had done so in the third instance, despite previously acknowledging that posting student names was a matter of concern.
On March 24, 2016, Marquette released an announcement detailing the decision of University President Michael Lovell, formally implementing the unanimous recommendation contained in a 123-page report composed by the Faculty Hearing Committee after a 4-day investigation. McAdams' suspension was extended until January 2017 without pay but with benefits, and any return was conditioned on his writing a full letter of apology by April 4, 2016. McAdams told local news media that the requirement to write an apology was "a deal killer. No, I`m not going to do that."
As I read the dissenting opinion, I realize this is just another way-point in the sad decline of my alma mater. They call themselves ‘Catholic’, ‘Jesuit’ and a ‘University’. The first two are outright fiction, and they remain a ‘university’ in only the most broad definition of the term.
When I was in high school, my chapter of of CYO was run by Jesuit brothers from the local monastery. They were frequently hooking up with teenage girls and occasionally teenage boys.
Justice Ann Bradley wrote a dissenting opinion, saying the court majority erred "in conducting only half of the academic freedom analysis"
"It fails to recognize, much less analyze, the academic freedom of Marquette as a private, Catholic, Jesuit university," Bradley wrote. "As a result, it dilutes a private educational institution's autonomy to make its own academic decisions in fulfillment of its unique mission."
Bradley concluded: "Apparently, the majority thinks it is in a better position to address concerns of academic freedom than a group of tenured faculty members who live the doctrine every day."
The point that McAdams released the name of the TA to the public is laughable.
Our names were published in the course catalog (now online).
To begin with I don’t accept any of academia’s use of any “committee of peers” to decide anything.
In an egineering company, the engineers are employees managed by persons with the agenda of the wole enterprise, not the sectarian interests of the engineers alone. The same is true of any successful enterprise with major specialties - the specialisst are not running the show. Coders do not run IT firms, and electrical engineers do not run telecom companies.
To me teachers running teaching institutions is like the patients running the mental asylum.
Moreover, it seems politics and power, regardless of the who involved, has been their catnip. And perpetual whoring of themselves to the most powerful led naturally into a worship of deviant behavior.
The Supreme Court clarified in United States v. Cruikshank that federal and state actors, not ordinary citizens, are the only entities that are constitutionally obligated to respect the rights that the states amend the Constitution to expressly protect. So since this case involves a private school, the professor was not protected by the Constitution imo.
"In its ruling, the Supreme Court overturned the convictions of the white men, holding that the Due Process Clause and the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment applies only to state action, not to actions by individual citizens. The Cruikshank case.
In other words, with reservation, the institutionally indoctrinated justices on Wisconsin Supreme court may have the wires crossed imo, not understanding the limits of constitutional protections.
The reservation is if the school violated a state free speech law which I doubt, regardless if the state law is a based on a misunderstanding of the scope of Constitutional protections.
Corrections, insights welcome.
You raise a valid point, but did the school raise this point in court?
Interesting to note that the AAUP supported McAdams: "The AAUP filed an amicus brief in the Wisconsin Supreme Court in support of Dr. John McAdams, a professor at Marquette University, who seeks to overturn the trial courts decision to deny his motion for summary judgment. The AAUP amicus brief explains that its policy documents and standards guaranteeing faculty rights of academic freedom and due process must protect faculty (like Dr. McAdams) from discipline when they express controversial views." linky
Thank you for your patience with this discussion.
At this point in time it sounds like problem is narrowing to a contract dispute.
But it is disturbing that court is treating case like free speech abridgment, correction welcome.
However, a MU contract broadly affords its faculty academic freedom, much more than say a smaller sectarian/denominational college, whereas a public university has academic freedom rights by law, not by contract.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.