As Harvard fights Trump admin in court, professors are quietly dropping courses
Now they are opting out of teaching the course due to fears of content-based retaliation and fears for their students' safety and as an openly transgender individual, according to a Monday court filing.
'I have had to reevaluate how I can safely teach courses on topics including global transgender history, World War II and the Holocaust,' Riegel said.
Riegels' decision comes at a time when Harvard University says it is fighting in federal court to protect its academic freedom, aiming to push back billions of dollars in funding cuts executed by the federal government.
The Harvard faculty chapter of the American Association of University Professors is also suing the federal government in a separate lawsuit. Riegel's commentary is included in court documents on the case.
Both Harvard and the association submitted motions for summary judgment on Monday.
As a non-tenure-track faculty member, Riegel said they are worried the Trump administration's goal of 'reducing the power held by students and untenured faculty,' as stated in an April 11 letter.
They are concerned about having 'even less control around my curriculum, such as hindering my ability to determine my own course content, or being forced to teach content with which I disagree,' they said.
'I am fearful for the safety of my students, especially international students or students with immigrant backgrounds, including their ability to engage with critical scholarship around the Holocaust and transgender history,' Riegel said.
'Because of the administration's actions, I could not in good conscience recommend that doctoral applicants attend Harvard right now,' they said.
Riegel isn't alone in altering course plans.
Read more: Harvard foreign students feel like 'poker chips,' consider transfer after Trump attacks
An anonymous faculty member in the court filing also changed their teaching plans for next semester due to fears of harassment.
The professor, a member of the faculty of arts and sciences, planned to teach a course addressing the lead-up to the U.S. Civil War, according to a court filing from Harvard professor Kirsten Weld.
However, they felt like the topic would be considered a part of diversity, equity and inclusion programing due to its focus on slavery, settler colonialism, Indian removal and the U.S.-Mexico War.
The professor was concerned that they would face false accusations under Title VI — which prohibits discrimination based on race, color, or national origin — since the course would explore white supremacy in American history.
They were also nervous that, because they had already experienced public targeting and harassment at Harvard due to being in support of pro-Palestine student protesters, greater emphasis could fall on them.
For other Harvard professors, canceling courses isn't an option.
One anonymous faculty member, who has been working at the medical school and has decades of clinical expertise, said they will be working outside of the U.S. next year and plan to eventually leave the country 'because they do not feel comfortable being at Harvard anymore.' The faculty member said their pro-Palestine advocacy and opinions make them a target at Harvard, according to the court filing.
Harvard researchers are also being discouraged from publishing in scholarly and public-facing materials on topics opposed by the federal government, according to Weld's court filing.
Since the attacks against Harvard, the American Association of University Professors has had to prioritize training on digital surveillance and information security and a Know Your Rights workshop, using up valuable resources for the organization.
They also have had to hold twice as many meetings with members as they typically do to help navigate the Trump administration's actions, according to the court filing.
Clark University to lay off up to 30% of faculty amid enrollment woes
'Incredibly ironic': Trump antisemitism effort may force out Harvard's Israeli Jews
MIT bans class president who gave pro-Palestine speech from commencement
Why the fight over foreign students at Harvard has some US students leaving, too
Harvard affinity group graduations held off campus amid 'capitulation' to Trump
Read the original article on MassLive.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Boston Globe
28 minutes ago
- Boston Globe
Education Department quietly removes rules for teaching English learners
Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up Since March, the Education Department has also laid off nearly all workers in its Office of English Language Acquisition and has asked Congress to terminate funding for the federal program that helps pay for educating English-language learners. Last week, education advocates noticed that the guidance document related to English learning had a new label indicating it was rescinded and remains online 'for historical purposes only.' Advertisement On Tuesday, Education Department spokesperson Madi Biedermann said that the guidance for teaching English learners, which was originally set forth in 2015, was rescinded because it 'is not in line with administration policy.' Advertisement A Justice Department spokesperson responded to questions by sending a link to the July memorandum and said he had no comment when asked whether the guidance would be replaced. For decades, the federal government has held that failing to provide resources for people not proficient in English constitutes discrimination based on national origin under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act. In rescinding the guidance, the Trump administration is signaling that it may stop enforcing the law under that long-standing interpretation. The Education and Justice departments have been responsible for enforcing the law. In the July memorandum, Attorney General Pam Bondi cited case law that says treating people, including students, who aren't proficient in English differently does not, on its face, amount to discrimination based on national origin. Other guidance related to language access for people using services across the federal government is also being suspended, according to the memo, and the Justice Department will create new guidance by mid-January to 'help agencies prioritize English while explaining precisely when and how multilingual assistance remains necessary.' The aim of the effort, Bondi said in a statement published alongside the memo, is to 'promote assimilation over division.' The consequences for school districts were not immediately clear, but advocates worry that rescinding the 2015 guidance could open the door for weaker instruction for English learners and upend decades of direction from the federal government to provide English-language services to students who need them. 'The Department of Education and the Department of Justice are walking away from 55 years of legal understanding and enforcement. I don't think we can understate how important that is,' said Michael Pillera, an attorney who worked at the Education Department's Office for Civil Rights for 10 years and now directs the Educational Opportunities Project at the Lawyers Committee for Civil Rights. Advertisement Without pressure from the federal government to comply with the law, it is possible that some school districts will drop services, Pillera said, particularly as many districts struggle with financial pressures. 'It's going to ripple quickly,' he predicted. 'Schools were doing this because the Office for Civil Rights told them they had to.' Many districts will probably not change their services, but rescinding the guidance opens the door, said Leslie Villegas, an education policy analyst at New America, a think tank. Advocates may watch for changes in districts that previously had compliance problems or those that had open cases with the Office for Civil Rights related to English-language instruction, she noted. 'The rescission of this guidance may create the mentality that no one's watching,' Villegas said. In recent months, the Justice Department notified at least three school districts — in Boston; Newark; and Worcester, Massachusetts — that the government was releasing them from government monitoring that had been in place to ensure they offered services to English-language learners. 'Unfortunately, we're not at all surprised,' Anna Krieger, executive director of Massachusetts Advocates for Children, said of the Trump administration's latest move. 'It's a really devastating decision.'' In anticipation of such a shift, Krieger said in a phone interview Wednesday evening, state lawmakers recently took action to ensure ongoing protections for Massachusetts students who are learning English and those with disabilities. 'They will still have the same rights next year that they had in the last school year,' she said. Advertisement Supporters of immigration restrictions argued that relieving pressure on schools to provide these services might be helpful, especially given the costs to districts. 'If you devote all these resources to these kids coming in [to school] completely unprepared, inevitably it will diminish the quality of education others are getting,' said Ira Mehlman, spokesperson for the Federation for American Immigration Reform. Todd DuBois, communications director for U.S. English, a group that advocates for English as the official and common language, said some education is needed to help 'bridge the gap' for students who do not speak English, but the group is concerned that multilingualism 'gets in the way of teaching English literacy earlier in life.' Tonya Alanez of the Globe staff contributed to this report.
UPI
29 minutes ago
- UPI
Vance, Hegseth, Miller laud Guard troops, denounce capital protesters
A Humvee is parked in front of Union Station in Washington as members of the National Guard patrol on Monday after President Donald Trump last week deployed the National Guard to assist in crime prevention. Photo by Bonnie Cash/UPI | License Photo Aug. 20 (UPI) -- As protesters chanted nearby, U.S. Vice President JD Vance, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller visited National Guardsmen in Washington, D.C., on Wednesday amid what the Trump administration says is a crime crackdown. The three Trump administration officials greeted National Guard troops at the capital's Union Station while positioned near a table containing hamburgers for the troops, PBS News reported. "In just the past nine days, we've seen a 35% reduction in violent crime," Vance told those in attendance. "We've seen over a 50% reduction in robberies," he added. "We're seeing really substantial effects because these guys are busting their a*****." Vance said he wanted to thank the National Guard troops in person and hand out some hamburgers to show his appreciation for their efforts. Hegseth said the National Guard deployments in Washington are needed to ensure residents, visitors and those who work in the capital are safe. "The American people, the residents of D.C., deserve a safe and beautiful city," Hegseth said. "That's our mission." He called the National Guard troops "patriots who serve the country" and want to make Washington a "beautiful, safe capital." The National Guard troops are "proud of this mission" and making sure "law and order is established here in the capital," Hegseth added. He said the Defense Department is providing the resources that the troops need and working with law enforcement partners to ensure safety in Washington. Pro-Palestinian protesters gathered and chanted near Union Station, which drew a rebuke from Vance. He said the protesters "hate the idea that Americans can enjoy their communities," according to PBS News. Vance said he went to Union Station with Hegseth and Miller because criminal activity was very high there, which local officials deny. Miller added to Vance's criticism of the protesters by calling them "stupid white hippies" and said they do not represent Washington, D.C.'s residents, The Hill reported. "We are not going to let the communists destroy a great American city, let alone the nation's capital," Miller said. "All these demonstrators you've seen out here in recent days, all these elderly white hippies, they're not part of the city and never have been," Miller said. "We're going to ignore these stupid white hippies that all need to go home and take a nap because they're all over 90 years old," he added. Trump last week put the federal government in control of Washington's Metropolitan Police Department, which has been accused of falsifying crime data. Though Trump administration officials have characterized crime in the city as out of control, in actuality, crime in the district has fallen in recent years or remained flat. An agreement on Friday put the police department under local control, but Trump sought and received National Guard deployments from West Virginia, South Carolina, Mississippi, Ohio, Tennessee and Louisiana. About 1,200 National Guard troops are slated for deployment in the capital, in addition to 800 Washington National Guard troops who already are there, according to The Washington Post.
29 minutes ago
NATO defense chiefs wrap talks on Ukraine security, but the path forward is unclear
Top U.S. and European defense officials spent much of this week privately discussing possible military options in Ukraine that would bolster the Eastern European country's protections against Russia. But the alliance's top military officials appeared to emerge without a concrete plan -- at least not one they were willing to discuss publicly. Gen. Dan Caine, President Donald Trump's top military adviser and chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, invited several of his European counterparts to dinner at his home at Fort Myer in Virginia on Tuesday evening. The discussion continued Wednesday online with a briefing by Gen. Alexus Grynkewich, the top U.S. commander in Europe, who also serves as head of NATO forces, officials said. The talks were aimed at providing military options that Trump and other political leaders in the NATO alliance could use to guarantee Ukraine's security as part of a peace deal between Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and Russian President Vladimir Putin. Zelenskyy has aggressively sought security guarantees from the alliance to ensure Russia would not attack again. United Kingdom officials have said previously that Great Britain and France are prepared to lead a multinational force in Ukraine, but it was not clear how many troops would be involved, from which countries, or what exactly the troops would do. On Tuesday, U.K. Prime Minister Keir Starmer hailed the possibility of NATO-backed security guarantees as a 'breakthrough,' noting that the U.S. was now working 'at pace' with 30 or so other countries, which he called a 'coalition of the willing,' to help Ukraine. 'These guarantees will ensure that if there is a peace, if there is a deal, then we hold to it and there isn't further conflict,' Starmer said in a video post on X. Likewise, Gen. Keith Kellogg, Trump's special envoy to Russia and Ukraine, said the security guarantees will ultimately help achieve any ceasefire in the three-year war. "If you bring in good security guarantees, this allows Zelenskyy some options as well to work with Putin so he can settle this conflict, and I think w'ere on a path to do that," Kellogg told Fox Business on Tuesday. But along with any commitment of troops, details on these possible security guarantees remained elusive Wednesday, as several officials said the discussions were still in the early stages and would need to become part of a broader political discussion going forward. Ivo Daalder, a former U.S. ambassador to NATO, told ABC News Live on Wednesday it was unlikely that NATO would cobble together a security agreement that would be acceptable to both Ukraine and the Europeans and to Russia. 'What you may get is a ceasefire, perhaps even an armistice, a more formal ceasefire that would require NATO security or European security guarantees to Ukraine to ensure that Russia does not restart the war,' Daalder continued. NATO officials struck an optimistic tone Wednesday following meetings with their counterparts, while avoiding discussing specifics. 'NATO has faced important times before,' said Col. Martin L. O'Donnell, a spokesperson for Grynkewich and the Supreme Headquarters Allied Powers Europe, in a statement following the meetings. 'And these have only made our Alliance Stronger,' he added. Adm. Giuseppe Cavo Dragone, chair of the NATO military committee, said members confirmed their support for Ukraine during the meeting Wednesday. The 'priority continues to be a just, credible and durable peace,' he wrote. For his part, Trump has said only that he won't send ground troops and suggested the U.S. could help with air assets. 'President Trump has been clear that the U.S. will not be sending boots on the ground, but may be willing to help in other ways,' a White House official told reporters on Wednesday.
