logo
LSU law professor sidelined for political speech sues university

LSU law professor sidelined for political speech sues university

Yahoo29-01-2025

The sun shines on the LSU Law Center on Monday, March 20, 2023, on Highland Road in Baton Rouge, La.
A tenured LSU law professor removed from his classes pending an investigation into alleged political comments is suing the university, saying it violated his First Amendment rights and its own policies.
Ken Levy, a professor of constitutional and criminal law, alleges he was removed from his classes earlier this month after political comments made on the first day of his Administration of Criminal Justice course were reported to Gov. Jeff Landry, which he believes led to calls to the university administration about his comments.
In his affidavit, Levy says that he brought up Landry's comments regarding fellow law professor Nick Bryner and asked his students not to record his lectures because he didn't want to be targeted by Landry.
'If Governor Landry were to retaliate against me, then f*** the governor and f*** that. — all of which was a joke and clearly said in a joking manner to highlight my no recording policy in class and the First Amendment,' Levy wrote in the affadavit.
Landry called on LSU to discipline Bryner last year for his comments about President Trump the day after the presidential election.
Levy argues in the affidavit that the actions taken against him stifle not only his right to free speech and academic freedom but that of other faculty members.
Landry spokeswoman Kate Kelly referred questions to LSU. University spokesman Todd Woodward has not yet responded to a request for comment.
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Levy is asking a judge to grant a temporary restraining order that would allow him to return to teaching as well as an order prohibiting LSU from taking further action against him.
In the suit, Levy also alleges LSU also violated its own policies regarding the punishment of a tenured professor.
Tenure provides an indefinite academic appointment to qualifying faculty members who have demonstrated excellence in their field. Academics with tenure can only be terminated for cause, but it typically only happens in extreme circumstances. College faculty view tenure as a key part of academic freedom at universities and a shield against political, corporate and religious intervention.
Levy attached a letter in his suit from LSU Director of Employee Relations Lindsay Madatic that informs Levy of his removal from the classroom 'pending an investigation into student complaints of inappropriate statements.' Madatic writes his compensation will remain unchanged and that he is permitted on campus.
Jill Craft, Levy's attorney, argues Madatic does not have the authority to discipline him.
In her request for a temporary restraining order, Craft said that LSU does not have a policy that allows for relieving a tenured professor of his or her duties.
LSU has several policy statements and permanent memorandum that address disciplining a tenured faculty member. These policies call for several layers of review, all of which require peer review panels. None of this happened before Levy was removed from his classes, which Levy and Craft contend is a form of discipline.
'No matter how characterized by LSU, its actions in unilaterally relieving [Levy] of his teaching duties violate his substantive and procedural rights,' Craft wrote.
Faculty Senate President Dan Tirone said the only time he was familiar with a professor being removed from the classroom pending an investigation involved Title IX allegations or other types of abuse. In those cases, the professor would also be prevented from accessing campus due to safety concerns.
The removal of Levy from the classroom led to significant backlash from the public and from LSU law students, who staged a protest Tuesday in his defense. The students delivered a petition to university general counsel Winston DeCuir calling for Levy to be reinstated, apologized to and for complete transparency into the disciplinary process.
At a Faculty Senate meeting Wednesday, Tirone advised faculty concerned about the incident to treat their classrooms like public forums. Although there are university and classroom policies prohibiting the recording of lectures, Tirone said these will not insulate professors from the consequences that can occur when students leak their remarks.
Tirone added that the Faculty Senate would continue to defend statements covered by academic freedom even if they are political or contentious.
SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Explainer-Does U.S. law allow Trump to send troops to quell protests?
Explainer-Does U.S. law allow Trump to send troops to quell protests?

Yahoo

time39 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Explainer-Does U.S. law allow Trump to send troops to quell protests?

By Dietrich Knauth President Donald Trump has deployed National Guard troops to California after two days of protests by hundreds of demonstrators against immigration raids, saying that the protests interfered with federal law enforcement and framing them as a possible 'form of rebellion' against the authority of the U.S. government. California Governor Gavin Newsom on Sunday said he had formally requested that the Trump Administration rescind "its unlawful deployment of troops in Los Angeles County" and return them to his command. WHAT LAWS DID TRUMP CITE TO JUSTIFY THE MOVE? Trump cited Title 10 of the U.S. Code, a federal law that outlines the role of the U.S. Armed Forces, in his June 7 order to call members of the California National Guard into federal service. A provision of Title 10 - Section 12406 - allows the president to deploy National Guard units into federal service if the U.S. is invaded, there is a 'rebellion or danger of rebellion' or the president is 'unable with the regular forces to execute the laws of the United States.' WHAT ARE NATIONAL GUARD TROOPS ALLOWED TO DO UNDER THE LAW CITED IN TRUMP'S ORDER? An 1878 law, the Posse Comitatus Act, generally forbids the U.S. military, including the National Guard, from taking part in civilian law enforcement. Section 12406 does not override that prohibition, but it allows the troops to protect federal agents who are carrying out law enforcement activity and to protect federal property. For example, National Guard troops cannot arrest protesters, but they could protect U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement who are carrying out arrests. WHAT ARE THE IMPLICATIONS FOR FREEDOM OF SPEECH? The First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution guarantees the right to assembly, freedom of speech and the press. Experts have said that Trump's decision to have U.S. troops respond to protests is an ominous sign for how far the president is willing to go to repress political speech and activity that he disagrees with or that criticizes his administration's policies. IS TRUMP'S MOVE SUSCEPTIBLE TO LEGAL CHALLENGES? Four legal experts from both left- and right-leaning advocacy organizations have cast doubt on Trump's use of Title 10 in response to immigration protests calling it inflammatory and reckless, especially without the support of California's Democratic Governor Gavin Newsom, who has said Trump's actions would only escalate tensions. The protests in California do not rise to the level of 'rebellion' and do not prevent the federal government from executing the laws of the United States, experts said. Title 10 also says "orders for these purposes shall be issued through the governors of the States," but legal experts said that language might not be an obstacle. Legislative history suggests that those words were likely meant to reflect the norms of how National Guard troops are typically deployed, rather than giving a governor the option to not comply with a president's decision to deploy troops. COULD CALIFORNIA SUE TO CHALLENGE TRUMP'S MOVE? California could file a lawsuit, arguing that deployment of National Guard troops was not justified by Title 10 because there was no 'rebellion' or threat to law enforcement. A lawsuit might take months to resolve, and the outcome would be uncertain. Because the protests may be over before a lawsuit is resolved, the decision to sue might be more of a political question than a legal one, experts said. WHAT OTHER LAWS COULD TRUMP INVOKE TO DIRECT THE NATIONAL GUARD OR OTHER U.S MILITARY TROOPS? Trump could take a more far-reaching step by invoking the Insurrection Act of 1792, which would allow troops to directly participate in civilian law enforcement, for which there is little recent precedent. Casting protests as an 'insurrection' that requires the deployment of troops against U.S. citizens would be riskier legal territory, one legal expert said, in part because mostly peaceful protests and minor incidents aren't the sort of thing that the Insurrection Act were designed to address. The Insurrection Act has been used by past presidents to deploy troops within the U.S. in response to crises like the 1794 Whiskey Rebellion and the rise of the Ku Klux Klan in the immediate aftermath of the American Civil War. The law was last invoked by President George H.W. Bush in 1992, when the governor of California requested military aid to suppress unrest in Los Angeles following the Rodney King trial. But, the last time a president deployed the National Guard in a state without a request from that state's governor was 1965, when President Lyndon Johnson sent troops to protect civil rights demonstrators in Montgomery, Alabama.

On the Record: Federal funding cuts threaten 1/3 of WTVP budget
On the Record: Federal funding cuts threaten 1/3 of WTVP budget

Yahoo

time2 hours ago

  • Yahoo

On the Record: Federal funding cuts threaten 1/3 of WTVP budget

PEORIA, Ill. (WMBD) — Local PBS affiliate stations like WTVP are sounding the alarm for their future after the Trump administration formally requested Congress to claw back funding for the next two years. WTVP President and CEO Jenn Gordon joined 'On the Record' and said the cuts will have a devastating impact on her station, which has just recovered from a financial situation of its own. 'So we're looking at an impact of about a third of our annual funding being immediately cut, if this rescission package goes through. So a lot is at stake here. More than 1.3 million people have already contacted Congress to voice their support [for public media],' she said. Gordon emphasized that public media differs from commercial media in that it's a private-public partnership. 'We're nonprofit organizations that rely in part on federal support to offer commercial-free programming to everyone. It was set up originally to receive some taxpayer dollars to get the ball rolling, but then also all of our local stations, we do quite a bit of fundraising to supplement that,' said Gordon. That federal funding could disappear in less than two months. The Trump administration, on Tuesday, sent Congress a rescission package, formally requesting the return of $1.1 billion already allocated for fiscal years 2026 and 2027 to fund the Corporation for Public Broadcasting. That starts a countdown of 45 days for Congress to respond. If passed, Gordon said local stations like WTVP stand to lose nearly a third of their annual funding. 'This isn't just about national programming,' Gordon warned. 'Smaller stations will feel the cut even more sharply. At WTVP, we'd have to immediately shift into emergency fundraising mode to try to close the gap. It could slow or stop local and educational programming, and delay production for new shows.' The rescission package comes on the heels of another blow to public media. President Trump issued an executive order on May 1 to shut down PBS and NPR, citing bias and irrelevance. Both organizations have filed lawsuits in response, arguing the order is a violation of the First Amendment. Gordon said the ripple effects from the loss of funding will be felt everywhere, from fewer children's programs to potential job impacts at the local level. 'Some of that federal funding goes to actually producing programs. So you're going to see a shortening of production timelines. And then additionally, at the local level, it's going to immediately need us to move into a grassroots fundraising mode to try and make up for that difference,' she said. So, how can you help? Gordon said to call or send a message to your lawmakers voicing your support for public media. You can also visit 'It takes five minutes and could make a real difference,' she said. On June 3, PBS President and CEO Paula Kerger echoed Gordon's sentiments in a statement. 'The proposed rescissions would have a devastating impact on PBS member stations and the essential role they play in communities, particularly smaller and rural stations that rely on federal funding for a larger portion of their budgets,' she said. 'Without PBS member stations, Americans will lose unique local programming and emergency services in times of crisis. There's nothing more American than PBS, and we are proud to highlight real issues, individuals, and places that would otherwise be overlooked by commercial media.' PBS was created in by the Corporation for Public Broadcasting in 1969 to provide Americans with a non-commercial space for news, educational programming, and inspirational content. There are approximately 350 stations across the country. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

LA police chief: ‘Ready to meet whatever challenges we may face'
LA police chief: ‘Ready to meet whatever challenges we may face'

USA Today

time3 hours ago

  • USA Today

LA police chief: ‘Ready to meet whatever challenges we may face'

LA police chief: 'Ready to meet whatever challenges we may face' LAPD Chief Jim McDonnell says department is 'well prepared' to handle ICE protests; has a 'great working relationship' with the National Guard. Show Caption Hide Caption Trump orders troops to LA as agents, protesters clash over immigration President Trump ordered 2,000 National Guard troops to Los Angeles to combat violent protesters opposed to immigration enforcement. Los Angeles Police Chief Jim McDonnell told USA TODAY his department will be 'well prepared' should any civil unrest occur during the third day of protests across the city. 'We certainly have a heavier deployment than usual,' McDonnell said June 8, declining to give a specific number. The chief said officers will be deployed outside a federal court building, the Metropolitan Detention Center, City Hall, and some parks where protests and demonstrations against deportation raids are scheduled to take place. 'You never know what's going to happen,' McDonnell said. 'We're more heavily deployed to meet whatever challenges we may face.' The chief's comments come as approximately 300 National Guard members arrived in Los Angeles after President Trump ordered the deployment of 2,000 officers, a move that California Gov. Gavin Newsom and L.A. Mayor Karen Bass have sharply criticized as inflammatory and unnecessary. Bass added that the presence of the National Guard could cause a 'chaotic escalation.' McDonnell said the LAPD is still figuring out what role the National Guard will play during any protests. 'It's still to be determined,' McDonnell said. 'Some of them just got on the ground, and we're trying to figure out how we can make this all work for everybody. For the city, the county and beyond. Our whole focus is on public safety.' McDonnell said the LAPD has worked very closely with the National Guard for months due to the deadly Palisades fires, adding, 'We have a great working relationship' with them. 'We're both here for the same reason, and that's ultimately to keep everybody safe,' McDonnell said. The determination of which agency will take the lead in handling any unruliness at protests and demonstrations, depends on when and where the unrest occurs, McDonnell said. The chief said there are 44 other law enforcement agencies in L.A. County that assist each other under a mutual aid agreement. 'It depends on where they are and what the circumstances are,' McDonnell said. 'We're responsible for the city of Los Angeles and the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department is responsible for the county. We work together all the time.' McDonnell said the LAPD will not take part in any immigration enforcement action as prohibited by law under the California Values Act, often referred to as a 'sanctuary law.' But the department will have a presence to quell any civil unrest as protesters exercise their First Amendment rights, the chief said. 'We adapt to the circumstances as they are presented to us,' McDonnell said. 'We're putting ourselves out there on the line every day, and I'm proud of our people and the job that they do on behalf of the community.'

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store