Tulane scientist resigns citing university censorship of pollution and racial disparity research
NEW ORLEANS — A Tulane University researcher resigned Wednesday, citing censorship from university leaders who had warned that her advocacy and research exposing the Louisiana petrochemical industry's health impacts and racial disparities in hiring had triggered blowback from donors and elected officials.
In her resignation letter, Kimberly Terrell accused the university of sacrificing academic freedom to appease Louisiana's Republican Gov. Jeff Landry. Terrell, the director of community engagement at Tulane's Environmental Law Clinic claimed the clinic had been 'placed under a complete gag order' that barred her from making public statements about her research.
According to emails obtained by The Associated Press, university leaders wrote that the work of the law clinic had become an 'impediment' to a Tulane redevelopment project reliant on support from state and private funders. The clinic represents communities fighting the petrochemical industry in court.
Kate Kelly, a Landry spokesperson, denied that the governor threatened to withhold state funding.
'I cannot remain silent as this university sacrifices academic integrity for political appeasement and pet projects,' Terrell wrote. 'Our work is too important, and the stakes are too high, to sit back and watch special interests replace scholarship with censorship.'
Terrell said she resigned 'to protect the work and interests' of the clinic.
Tulane spokesperson Michael Strecker said in an emailed statement that the university 'is fully committed to academic freedom and the strong pedagogical value of law clinics.' He declined to comment on 'personnel matters.'
Many of the clinic's clients are located along the heavily industrialized 85-mile (137-kilometer) stretch of the Mississippi River between New Orleans and Baton Rouge commonly referred to by environmental groups as 'Cancer Alley.'
Marcilynn Burke, dean of Tulane's law school, wrote in a May 4 email to clinic staff that Tulane University President Michael Fitts worried the clinic's work threatened to tank support for the university's long-sought efforts to redevelop New Orleans' historic Charity Hospital as part of a downtown expansion.
'Elected officials and major donors have cited the clinic as an impediment to them lending their support to the university generally and this project specifically,' Burke wrote.
Burke did not respond to an emailed request for comment Wednesday.
In her resignation letter, Terrell wrote that she had been told the governor 'threatened to veto' any state funding for the expansion project unless Tulane's president 'did something' about the clinic.
A 2022 study Terrell co-authored found higher cancer rates in Black or impoverished communities in Louisiana. Another study she published last year linked toxic air pollution in Louisiana with premature births and lower weight in newborns.
In April, Terrell published research showing that Black people received significantly less jobs in the petrochemical industry than white people in Louisiana despite having similar levels of training and education.
Media coverage of the April study coincided with a visit by Tulane leaders to Louisiana's capitol to lobby elected officials in support of university projects. Shortly after, Burke, the law school's dean, told clinic staff in an email that 'all external communications' such as social media posts and media interviews 'must be pre-approved by me.'
Emails from May show that Burke denied requests from Terrell to make comments in response to various media requests, correspondence and speaking engagements, saying they were not 'essential functions of the job.'
On May 12, Terrell filed a complaint with the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools Commission on Colleges, claiming that her academic freedom had been violated. The agency, which accredits Tulane, did not comment.
In a May 21 audio recording obtained by the AP, Provost Robin Forman said that when Tulane leadership met with elected officials in April, they were pressed as to why ''Tulane has taken a stand on the chemical industry as harming communities',' and this 'left people feeling embarrassed and uncomfortable.'
Burke said in an email that university leaders had misgivings about a press release in which a community activist represented by Terrell's clinic is quoted as saying that petrochemical companies 'prioritize profit over people.' Burke noted that Fitts was concerned about the clinic's science-based advocacy program, and Terrell's work in particular which he worried had veered 'into lobbying.' Burke said Fitts required an explanation of 'how the study about racial disparities relates directly to client representation.'
The clinic cites the study in a legal filing opposing a proposed chemical plant beside a predominantly Black neighborhood , arguing the community would be burdened with a disproportionate amount of pollution and less than a fair share of the jobs.
The clinic's annual report highlighted its representation of a group of residents in a historic Black community who halted a massive grain terminal that would have been built around 300 feet from their homes.
The provost viewed the clinic's annual report 'as bragging that the clinic has shut down development,' Burke said in an email.
In her resignation letter, Terrell warned colleagues that she felt Tulane's leaders 'have chosen to abandon the principles of knowledge, education, and the greater good in pursuit of their own narrow agenda.'
___
Brook is a corps member for The Associated Press/Report for America Statehouse News Initiative. Report for America is a nonprofit national service program that places journalists in local newsrooms to report on undercovered issues.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New York Times
15 minutes ago
- New York Times
U.S. Steel and Nippon Steel Say Their ‘Partnership' Is Sealed
U.S. Steel and Nippon Steel announced on Friday that they had entered into an agreement with the U.S. government to seal the terms of a 'partnership' between the companies, more than a year after the Japanese steel maker first tried to buy its U.S. competitor. Former President Joseph R. Biden Jr., under pressure from the United Steelworkers union, blocked the deal on the basis that it was a threat to national security. President Trump, who also initially opposed the deal, reversed himself and decided to look for a way to revive it. The companies referred to the deal as a partnership, echoing language that Mr. Trump used in describing the transaction he blessed three weeks ago. But U.S. Steel has not indicated to shareholders that it has altered the $14.9 billion sale to Nippon that they approved in April last year. 'We thank President Trump and his administration for their bold leadership and strong support for our historic partnership,' the companies said in a statement. 'This partnership will bring a massive investment that will support our communities and families for generations to come.' The companies said they had entered into agreement with the U.S. government to alleviate any security concerns posed by the deal, known as a national security agreement, which calls for roughly $11 billion in new investments by 2028. The deal will also give the U.S. government a 'golden share' in the company, a rarely used practice through which the government takes a stake in company. In the United States, the government has typically taken a stake only in companies that are ailing or in particular need of government attention, like General Motors during the 2008 financial crisis. This is a developing story. Check back for updates.
New York Times
15 minutes ago
- New York Times
Live Updates: Protests Could Be ‘Unprecedented' in L.A., Where Marines Are Guarding Federal Building
The tremors of political unrest that shook Los Angeles and several American cities this week have stirred a range of emotions in people — pride, disgust, fear, hope. In interviews with voters on Thursday, one sentiment that transcended political affiliation seemed to be uncertainty. Some of President Trump's voters said they did not support what they were seeing now: a show of force that exceeds his electoral mandate. Some of those who did not support Mr. Trump were not sure that they liked what they were seeing either. They expressed pride in the throngs of demonstrators marching peacefully against deportation policies that they see as cruel and indecent. But at the same time, those voters said the violent incidents that have accompanied some of the protests were counterproductive and shameful. — Jeremy W. Peters 'I'm proud of L.A.' Annabelle Collins, 36, Mercedes, Texas Image Credit... Annabelle Collins During the presidential campaign last year, Annabelle Collins was torn. In her day job, she helps families at a school district program for migrants, who often move seasonally for agriculture jobs. Many of those families have become fearful of the Trump administration's raids, and she saw how they were still traumatized from what they suffered in their home countries. Recently, she helped organize a free clothing drive for children at a department store, but many people were afraid to come out. At the same time, though, her husband is a border parol agent, and his stories have led her to believe that illegal border crossings need to be tamped down. She ended up voting for Kamala Harris, she said. When Mr. Trump was elected, she thought his administration would target only unauthorized immigrants with criminal backgrounds, but now, she said, she believes that ICE is focusing on Latinos more generally. 'I'm proud of L.A.,' she said of the protests. Ms. Collins said she doesn't like to see violence at the demonstrations. 'But sometimes it's like, is that what we need to make a statement or to have people listen?' she said. 'I don't know, and I do struggle with that. There is a lot of passion behind these protests, because people are tired. I would love for it to be peaceful and to make an impact, but will it?' — Christina Morales 'If you are here illegally, the government has the right to go after you.' Edward Padron, 67, Brownsville, Texas Image Credit... Edward Padron Edward Padron, a locksmith who left the Democratic Party as a young man, said the images of ICE agents arresting immigrants at workplaces may appear 'harsh.' But he said the arrests are the right thing to do to protect the nation's legal system. 'They are enforcing the law,' Mr. Padron said. 'The laws have always been there — that if you are here illegally, the government has the right to go after you.' While he agrees with enforcing immigration laws, he said the government should have a program to replace workers in key industries, like construction and farming, who are being deported. He would like to see something like the Bracero Program, a World War II-era agreement that allowed Mexican citizens to work on American farms and in related jobs for a fixed period of time. 'Somebody has to do those jobs, and Americans don't want them,' he said. — Edgar Sandoval To protest 'is our right.' Clifford Eugene, 74, Lacombe, La. Image Credit... Clifford Eugene As Clifford Eugene watched protests ballooning in Los Angeles this week, he was reminded of the demonstrations and sit-ins he witnessed as a middle-school student in New Orleans during the Civil Rights Movement. To Mr. Eugene, a retired bank examiner for the Treasury Department, protests in various cities are part of an enduring tradition of civil disobedience in response to social injustices. 'It is our most immediate way of disagreeing with government policy,' he said. 'It is our right.' He said he thought Mr. Trump's use of the military to quell demonstrations was 'overkill,' intended to generate publicity, score points with his base, and distract attention from his feud with Elon Musk and the domestic policy bill. The military parade in Washington on Saturday — celebrating the Army's 250th anniversary and held on Mr. Trump's 79th birthday — bothered him the most, he said. Mr. Eugene, who served for 12 years in the U.S. Navy, said the president had a long history of disparaging service members and veterans, and should not be allowed to use them as props. 'This feels like a tactic used by dictators in Russia or North Korea,' he said. — Audra D. S. Burch 'How did you not see this coming?' Brian Kozlowski, 40, Orlando, Fla. Image Credit... Brian Kozlowski Brian D. Kozlowski, a lawyer who supports Mr. Trump, said on Thursday that the president responded appropriately to the protests in Los Angeles. 'It was necessary, given the riots,' he said. 'If you're the governor of a state and you're not cooperating with the law and federal agents, who are then getting attacked by citizens of the state,' he said, 'then at that point, the federal government has every right to step in.' 'I don't know what world you live in where you think you can attack a law enforcement officer,' he added. The demonstrations in Los Angeles were generally peaceful, but there were pockets of violence, including protesters who kicked and threw objects at law enforcement vehicles, and officers have used tear gas. Mr. Kozlowski said it appeared to him that Gov. Gavin Newsom of California was playing politics with the protests, allowing them to continue without requesting help from the National Guard so that he could cast himself as a foil to Mr. Trump. 'It certainly seems like there's a lot of politically motivated decision-making taking place — or lack of decision-making,' he said. Mr. Kozlowski said Americans should not be surprised that the Trump administration was following through on aggressive immigration enforcement, since Mr. Trump promised during the election campaign to do so. 'How did you not see this coming?' he asked. — Patricia Mazzei 'There's always fear that comes with going to a protest.' Thien Doan, 36, Orange, Calif. Image Credit... Thien Doan Thien Doan was born in the United States to parents who were refugees from Vietnam. He grew up surrounded by immigrants, some documented, some not. He's worked with them in restaurants and attended their children's quinceañeras. 'Most of these people are not violent criminals,' he said. 'They've welcomed me into their homes.' After a number of immigration raids in Southern California last week, Mr. Doan, a software engineer, felt the need to speak out. He headed to a protest on Sunday in Santa Ana, Calif. Unauthorized immigrants 'need people there that understand,' he said, 'and are willing to put themselves in front of harm's way to protect them.' Mr. Doan, who voted for Kamala Harris last year, said he expected to continue to demonstrate against the federal crackdown as long as the immigration raids and deportations continue. But it would not be without some sense of trepidation. 'There's always fear that comes with going to a protest,' said Mr. Doan, who has attended other protests before. 'You don't know if you're going to get injured, get arrested or whatever. 'But I feel like, at the same time, if I don't stand up now, I might regret it later down the line. And I don't want to be that person that regrets not trying to help the people around me.' — Laurel Rosenhall 'I saw a lot of flags being run down the street by different countries. That was disturbing to me.' Naomi Villalba, 75, Dallas Image Credit... Naomi Villalba As a Mexican American woman who received U.S. citizenship as a teenager, Naomi Villalba's views on immigration have always been clear: She believes that people need to come into the country legally, and if they are undocumented, to work on getting their papers. Ms. Villalba likes Mr. Trump's policies on immigration, and believes that all demonstrations would be more effective if they were peaceful. 'I did see that there was chaos in that city,' she said, speaking of Los Angeles, 'and I saw a lot of flags being run down the street by different countries. That was disturbing to me because they came in very ready to fight.' She said she was worried that the protests were beginning to emulate those in 2020, during the height of the Black Lives Matter movement, which in some cases devolved into destructive riots. Ms. Villalba, who retired from a career at Southwest Airlines and now works part-time as a substitute teacher, thought that Mr. Trump's decision to send the National Guard to Los Angeles reflected lessons that the administration learned from 2020. 'I think it's quelling it somewhat' she said of the violence, 'and I'm hoping that we will not be talking about this in another week or so.' — Christina Morales 'I thought we had gotten past a lot of our bigotry.' Erwin McKone, 55, of Flint, Mich. Image Credit... Erwin McKone Erwin McKone, who works in sales for an agribusiness company, describes himself as a centrist voter. He supported Mr. Trump last November mainly because he wanted tighter border controls. He had hoped federal agents would focus on deporting people who 'are up to no good.' But Mr. McKone has been dismayed by the Trump administration's crackdown on undocumented immigrants, which he called 'indiscriminate' and 'cruel.' And Mr. McKone said he thought the president deployed National Guard troops and Marines to handle protests in Los Angeles 'just because people want to walk the streets and question policies.' Mr. McKone wants the president to increase the number of visas issued to temporary workers so they fill jobs that have historically drawn people to immigrate illegally. 'We have played a role in this,' Mr. McKone said, adding that in the past, he had employed unauthorized immigrants. 'We've allowed illegals in to work in our country for years.' 'The way he's doing things is appealing to the racist side of America,' he said. 'I thought we had gotten past a lot of our bigotry and our racist tendencies.' — Ernesto Londoño
New York Times
15 minutes ago
- New York Times
Trump's Decision to Send Troops to California Is His Do-Over of 2020
In 2020, as racial justice protests swept through the country over the murder of George Floyd, President Trump was itching to deploy the military to crush the unrest. He was talked out of it by his top national security advisers, who feared that such a decision would be viewed as moving toward martial law. Five years later, as protests against his immigration policies began to swell in Los Angeles, Mr. Trump said he had learned his lesson. 'I'll never do that again,' Mr. Trump said on Thursday, about waiting to send in the National Guard in 2020. 'If I see problems brewing,' he added, 'I'm not going to wait two weeks.' With the Los Angeles protests, Mr. Trump has seized the chance to make up for his first-term regret. His decision to send in federal troops right away, taking the extraordinary step of deploying active-duty military to deal with domestic unrest, fits into the larger pattern of Mr. Trump operating without any significant pushback from the people around him in his second term. 'He saw the military as his reactionary arm,' said Olivia Troye, a former homeland security official and aide to former Vice President Mike Pence. Ms. Troye said she witnessed multiple national security officials explain to Mr. Trump in 2020 that the military takes an oath to the Constitution — not Mr. Trump — and that it should not be turned against American citizens, even protesters. Want all of The Times? Subscribe.
