Penn Law Disputes Prof's Claim She Was Asked to Take Leave Due to Op-Ed
Professor Amy Wax says the school offers an example of how campus free speech is being undermined.
February 20, 2018 at 02:21 PM
4 minute read
The original version of this story was published on The Legal Intelligencer
A professor at the University of Pennsylvania Law School claims the school's dean recently asked her to take a leave of absence after she published a controversial op-ed last year, but the school says the dean was merely discussing a routine sabbatical with her.
Amy Wax alleges in a new Wall Street Journal op-ed published Feb. 16 about free speech on campus that Penn Law Dean Ted Ruger asked her to stop teaching required first-year courses in addition to taking a leave of absence after her first op-ed created a firestorm. Wax offered the request as an example of how college campuses pay lip service to free speech and free inquiry when in reality those who espouse views that are not politically correct face personal attacks rather than reasoned debate.
The law school on Tuesday disputed Wax's characterization of events, saying that Ruger's conversation with Wax was not in response to her op-ed, but a routine discussion about her taking a sabbatical.
“Mentioned in her recent op-ed was a discussion with the dean about the timing of a regularly-accrued sabbatical, a discussion the dean has with many faculty members each year, as every tenured faculty member enjoys a sabbatical benefit, with full pay,” said Penn Law spokesman Steve Barnes on Tuesday.
Barnes said Wax is scheduled to teach her popular “Conservative Legal Thought” course both semesters next year.
“The dean has repeatedly and publicly defended the rights of Penn Law faculty and students—professor Wax, her critics, and others in our community—to express their views freely and openly without fear of censure,” Barnes said.
What's not in dispute is that the original op-ed, published on Aug. 9, led to a backlash against Wax and co-author Larry Alexander, a professor at the University of San Diego Law School. Critics charged that their op-ed, published in August in The Philadelphia Inquirer under the title “Paying the Price for the Breakdown of the Country's Bourgeois Culture,” was racist. (Alexander said on Tuesday that some students raised objections at the time, but that he has faced no official repercussions at San Diego.)
The initial op-ed argued that a breakdown of American cultural norms in the 1950s and 1960s such as marriage before children, respect for authority, and low levels of substance abuse and crime, has undermined American's stability and strength.
Wax acknowledges in her latest op-ed that one passage in which the authors argued that “some cultures are less suited to preparing people to be productive citizens in a modern technological society” proved particularly controversial. They offer the “rap culture of inner-city blacks” and the growing “anti-assimilation ideas” among Hispanic immigrants as some of the examples of negative trends.
Some 33 of Wax's Penn Law faculty colleagues published a response in the campus newspaper that condemned her op-ed piece.
“We categorically reject Wax's claims,” it reads.
Wax's Wall Street Journal piece argues that her faculty critics should not have condemned her but instead should have offered a substantive critique of her arguments.
“This kind of civil discourse is obviously important at law schools like mine, because law schools are dedicated to teaching students how to think about and argue all sides of a question,” reads Wax's op-ed. “But academic institutions in general should also be places where people are free to think and reason about important questions that affect our society and way of life—something not possible in today's atmosphere of enforced orthodoxy.”
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All'What Is Certain Is Uncertainty': Patchwork Title IX Rules Face Expected Changes in Second Trump Administration
5 minute read'No Evidence'?: Big Law Firms Defend Academic Publishers in EDNY Antitrust Case
3 minute readLaw Firms Are Turning to Online Training Platforms as Apprenticeship Model Falters
'Substantive Deficiencies': Judge Grants Big Law Motion Dismissing Ivy League Price-Fixing Claims
3 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Infant Formula Judge Sanctions Kirkland's Jim Hurst: 'Overtly Crossed the Lines'
- 2Trump's Return to the White House: The Legal Industry Reacts
- 3Election 2024: Nationwide Judicial Races and Ballot Measures to Watch
- 4Climate Disputes, International Arbitration, and State Court Limitations for Global Issues
- 5Judicial Face-Off: Navigating the Ethical and Efficient Use of AI in Legal Practice [CLE Pending]
- 6How Much Does the Frequency of Retirement Withdrawals Matter?
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250