By Greg Sargent and Paul Waldman
The Washington Post
Excerpt: At first glance, the plight of Katherine Rinderle, a fifth-grade teacher in Georgia, might seem confusing. Rinderle faces likely termination by the Cobb County School District for reading aloud a children’s book that touches on gender identity. Yet she is charged in part with violating policy related to a state law banning “divisive concepts” about race, not gender.
This disconnect captures something essential about state laws and directives restricting classroom discussion across the country: They seem to be imprecisely drafted to encourage censorship. That invites parents and administrators to seek to apply bans to teachers haphazardly, forcing teachers to err on the side of muzzling themselves rather than risk unintentionally crossing fuzzy lines into illegality
Katherine Knott
Inside Higher Ed
Excerpt: If colleges and universities want to receive funding from the National Institutes of Health (NIH), they’ll have to certify that they don’t operate any diversity, equity, inclusion or accessibility programs that violate federal antidiscrimination laws, under a new NIH policy announced Monday.
The change appears to codify parts of President Donald Trump’s executive orders that banned funding for DEI programs and builds on the strategy to leverage colleges’ research funding to compel certain behaviors. But the new policy goes even further than the president’s directives, barring colleges from boycotting Israel or Israeli businesses if they want to receive NIH grants.
FIRE
Excerpt: FIRE today filed a "friend of the court" brief in support of the American Association of University Professors and the American Federation of Teachers in their lawsuit against the Department of Justice and other federal agencies. FIRE argues that the Trump administration's actions against Columbia University are unlawful and unconstitutional attacks on freedom of expression, freedom of association, and academic freedom. The brief's summary of argument follows.
J. D. Tuccille
Reason
Excerpt: Given the censorious conduct of colleges and universities in recent years, it takes a lot to get free speech advocates to treat them as aggrieved parties. But the Trump administration has accomplished that by using the power of the state to coerce changes in campus political climates, disciplinary procedures, and hiring practices. Harvard University is digging in its heels and suing the federal government in response.
But if institutions of higher learning really want to assert their independence, they should emulate a school with a lower profile and fewer resources that won its freedom by cutting ties with the government decades ago: They should follow the example of Hillsdale College.