Your Cart is Empty
Scott Gac
Inside Higher Ed
Excerpt: The email from faculty in our would-be 51st state up north confirmed what I’d been suspecting for months: though I’d been selected as the finalist for a Fulbright chair at a Canadian university, the U.S. Department of State refused to approve my file.
It wasn’t a shock—race is at the center of my research. And I know that I am not alone in this Fulbright conundrum. But it was a gut punch. As a faculty member at a liberal arts institution, my access to external support is far more limited than that of colleagues at research institutions. When I am able to look past the personal sting, however, it’s easy to see the move as part of a broader effort—in the form of economic sanctions and ideological surveillance—to shape the expression of ideas and values in American higher education.
Comments will be approved before showing up.
Violating the First Amendment will cost you. Universities and other public institutions are learning this lesson the hard way as the dust settles on a series of lawsuits brought by university faculty and staff who were punished for their comments about Charlie Kirk’s murder last September.
If Johns Hopkins University wanted to signal its seriousness about creating an alternative to the left-leaning orthodoxy that permeates higher education, it couldn’t have done better than the recent hire of economist Peter Arcidiacono.
House Republicans have now formally backed President Donald Trump in fulfilling his campaign promise to dismantle the Department of Education, voting Wednesday to advance 10 bills that would codify the White House’s efforts to disperse numerous education programs and offices to other federal agencies.
