Academia

Texas Professor Sues University After Being Allegedly Threatened Over His Criticism of CRT and DEI

We have been discussing various cases of professors being investigated or terminated for raising dissenting views on subjects like systemic racism or Critical Race Theory (CRT). The latest such controversy is at the University of Texas where a professor is suing after he was allegedly threatened for criticizing as having “no scientific basis.” Notably, the complaint of Dr. Richard Lowery (below) admits that, despite being tenured, he began to self-censor his comments — a problem that is widespread among academics who now fear to speak freely in class or even outside of their universities.

Dr. Richard Lowery is an associate professor of finance at the McCombs School of Business and has written on a variety of subjects in The Hill, the Texas Tribune, the Houston Chronicle, the Ft. Worth Star-Telegram, the Washington Times, and The College Fix.

He claims that he was warned about his continuing criticism, including the possible loss of his affiliation with the Salem Center, which would cost him a $20,000 stipend and research opportunities.

The complaint details pressure put on Lowery and his superior to get him to “tone down” his criticisms. The includes alleged lobbying by Meeta Kothare, director of the Global Sustainability Leadership Institute “to have UT Administrators censor Lowery.” At the same time, another Sustainability Institute employee, Madison Gove, emailed UT police officer Joseph Bishop, to ask for police surveillance of Lowery’s public statements.

Gove wrote “His name is Richard Lowery . . . [a]s mentioned, we are more worried about the people he reaches than him. Some of his supporters are authors, podcasters, and politicians. . . . Unfortunately, he switched his account to private mode today, so I cannot give you anything other than what I have. Perhaps you all can see more. The link is https://twitter.com/RichardLoweryTX.” Gove also provided Officer Bishop with screenshots of Lowery’s tweets, which she had gathered before he had set his account to private. Kothare and other UT administrators were copied on Gove’s email to the UT police requesting surveillance of Lowery’s speech. There is no indication that any UT administrator withdrew the request for police surveillance.

It has been common for critics to claim that a conservative faculty member is threatening the safety of colleagues or students by voicing dissenting views of subjects like CRT or DEI.

What is striking about the complaint is the Lowery said that the pressure worked and that he stopped his criticism. He then said that he decided to sue over the alleged pressure and harassment.

The reference to the chilling effect on speech is unfortunately all too familiar. We recently discussed how professors at MIT are fearful of speaking freely in class. Likewise, a recently discussed poll showed roughly 60 percent of students say that they fear speaking openly in class. That percentage is consistent with other polls taken across the country.

Cancel campaigns are now a common pattern in schools ranging from Yale to Northwestern to Georgetown.  Blocking others from speaking is not the exercise of free speech. It is the very antithesis of free speech. Nevertheless, faculty have supported such claims. CUNY Law Dean Mary Lu Bilek showed how far this trend has gone. When conservative law professor Josh Blackman was stopped from speaking about “the importance of free speech,”  Bilek insisted that disrupting the speech on free speech was free speech. (Bilek later cancelled herself and resigned over a comment that she made in a faculty meeting).

This dangerous trend in academia is discussed in my law review article, Jonathan Turley, “Harm and Hegemony: The Decline of Free Speech in the United States”, Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy.

One of the interesting aspects of the case will be any litigation over the chilling effect claimed in the complaint. The defendants are likely to argue that the instances of reduced speech were manufactured or calculated in anticipation of legal action. However, the complaint details specific efforts to get Lowery to change his public criticisms with specific references to his positions at the university. The defendants are also likely to argue that, while he is entitled to speak freely, the university can protect its programs from backlash due to the public controversies of an academic.

The lawsuit could have beneficial impacts by exposing common methods used to silence faculty critics. The campaign alleged in the complaint are very familiar tactics used to threaten faculty members. This includes both pressure from within the faculty and outside cancel campaigns. The academic flash mob pattern is now all too familiar.

Few professors are willing to risk such isolation and shunning. These campaigns take everything of value from an academic if they stand up and express dissenting thoughts. Even though the number of conservative and libertarian faculty have been reduced to near zero (or absolute zero) on many faculties, polls show even generally liberal faculty members are still fear possible retaliation for speaking freely as are their students. Most professors remain silent in the face of retaliatory actions directed at colleagues like Lowery. Others even lead the mob to target colleagues.

The greatest threat to the University of Texas could be discovery. If Lowery makes it through a motion to dismiss, he could start to call some of these officials into depositions. That could expose how these pressure campaigns use various pressure points to coerce or intimidate faculty into silence.

Here is the complaint: Lowery v. Mills

84 thoughts on “Texas Professor Sues University After Being Allegedly Threatened Over His Criticism of CRT and DEI”

  1. 81 million voted for this stumbling idiot. FJ Brandon has a history of stumbling, in Afghanistan, in handling inflation, in wastefully adding to the deficit, in stating Russia could have “an incursion” in Ukraine, in his dealings with China, in his weaponizing the Dept of Justice, the FBI, the Dept of the Treasury, etc. against political opponents, his foreign policy with Iran, in almost EVERYTHING he touches but especially touching children in all of the wrong places

    Brandon turned around after he stumbled on the stairs, and saw that no one cared. Waved to the breeze and slithered into the plane. Like, dang. No one even accompanied him up the stairs as a kind gesture. Pity a CCP balloon did not swoop down and carried Brandon away

    1. Estovir, Bret Stephens is a conservative columnist for The New York Times. But you should read the comments. Several are from readers familiar with the study. And they seem to think that Stephens misrepresents the study.

      Furthermore, you need to decide ‘when’ the NYT is credible, as opposed to cherry picking what want to think is credible.

      1. Anonymous, are you now telling us that The New York Times is publishing disinformation? Are you telling us that even though Brett Stephens is providing falsehoods to its readers that The Times just went on and published the story anyway? Are you saying that The New York Times didn’t fact check scientific evidence before the article was published? Apparently you are now saying that The New York Times is no more responsible than The New York Post concerning what they allow in their paper. When it doesn’t line up with your viewpoint you will even trash the editors at The New York Times. I understand. No one is going to keep you from getting your fix for the day.

  3. One Republican Calls For ‘More’ Regulation Of Railroads

    Ohio Gov. Mike DeWine (R) called it “absurd” that the Norfolk Southern train did not qualify as a “high-hazard flammable train” — a federal classification that triggers speed limits and other safety requirements. He has called on Congress to take action to address regulatory shortfalls.

    Of the 50 train cars that either derailed or were damaged in the resulting fire, 20 contained hazardous material, according to the Environmental Protection Agency, which is now in charge of the cleanup.

    “There is something fundamentally wrong when a train like this can come into a state and the current law, despite what they were hauling, does not require them to notify the state or local officials,” DeWine said Tuesday at a news conference.

    https://www.huffpost.com/entry/republicans-ohio-train-disaster-safety-reforms-trump_n_63f57ecce4b0616708de41fb/amp#amp_tf=From%20%251%24s&aoh=16770949296826&referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com
    ……………………………

    Many Republicans are criticizing Biden’s handling of the Ohio spill. But oddly these same Republicans won’t say what regulations are needed. Governor DeWine, however, makes his views clear.

    1. I do not blame Biden for the train wreck. I do not blame Republicans for the train wreck. Bleach is a hazardous material and it has to be transferred from one place to another. It is obvious that the Democrats are trying to blame Trump for regulations that were written long before he came into office. Now their trying to blame Trump for the catastrophe at the southern boarder. You have to be really stupid not to see what they are doing. It’s a fact that character has nothing to do with it.

    2. Anonymous – Democrats have been in control of Congress since 2019 and in control of the White House since 2001. If there was a particular regulation which you now believe would have avoided this derailment, why are you not complaining about the Democrats for not passing the law or enacting the regulation?

    3. Many Republicans are criticizing Biden’s handling of the Ohio spill. But oddly these same Republicans won’t say what regulations are needed. Governor DeWine, however, makes his views clear.

      I would love to lay this at the feet of the Biden Administration, but Railroads operate as sovereign nations.
      They are their own law, and their own regulatory agency.
      Go ahead complain, but its been going on since the 1930’s.

      That Mayor Pete is clueless, is just Mayor Pete, doing Mayor Pete things. He knowledge is minimal at best.
      But DeWine? He’s been around the track a few times.
      Maybe its just my experience having a main line twin track running through the family farm, and dealing with derailments. Then working for grain elevators that rail shipped grain, has exposed me to the Railroads Power unto themselves.
      Railroad employees don’t pay into Social security. I guess that like some states do the same for their employees.

    4. Regulation under the Constitution must be conducted by each several industry.

      Self-regulation is imperative for the financial viability of each industry; strict self-regulation is the best defense against destructive litigation and insolvency.

      There is no enumerated power for Congress to regulate anything except money, commerce, and land and naval Forces.

  4. Jonathan: The Dr. Richard Lowery is just one of many conservatives whose cause you have taken up as a “free speech” issue. Lowery is vociferously opposed to CRT and DEI policies at Texas University. In an interview back in 2022 Lowery called CRT “racialized Marxism” that wants to “overturn the current system”. He said CRT “a lot more like fascism and a lot less like free speech”. Lowery thinks Texas University has become a “social justice indoctrination camp” and he is going to fight it in court. He is not the kind to self-censor. Considering that Lowery has not been disciplined for his clearly minority and isolated views it doesn’t appear he has some direct personal injury that would warrant court intervention.

    I have pointed in other comments you have a very narrow definition of “free speech”. For you that right only applies to conservatives. But “free speech” applies to everyone no matter their political views. But what you ignore are other threats to free expression and academic freedom right under your nose. We see this playing out in Florida under right-wing Gov. DeSantis. The University of Florida administration has endorsed Gov. DeSantis’ anti-CRT agenda and is warning professors that violating the law risks $106 million in funding–a not so subtle attempt to gag professors who include CRT in course material.

    Then there is Samuel Joeckel, an English professor at FL’s Atlantic University. Earlier in the month Joeckel was told by an administrator, in Joeckel’s words, “my contract was being delayed pending a review of the material I use in my racial justice unit. I asked him what the concern was. He said that the concern was that I was ‘indoctrinating students'”. Joeckel added: “In 12 years I have been teaching a racial-justice unit, no administrator had ever voiced any concern about my unit. So the first time was also the time when I was told my contract may not be renewed”. AU does not offer tenure. Thousands of Joeckel’s former students and others concerned about the threats to the professor’s right to free expression have rallied to Joeckel’s defense. There is an on-line petition calling for the university not to fire Joeckel. I also signed the petition. Now if you are really concerned about the Gov. DeSantis’ attacks on “free speech” you could write a column in defense of Professor Joeckel or also sign the petition. I’m sure it would help. Somehow I think you won’t because–well, that would be an admission that conservatives who get power do exactly the same thing you think only happens to conservatives when they are the victims. Double standard by you? Yep!

    1. There is no double-standard. CRT and DIE are busslhit theories based on statistics that are based on lies (not your everyday statistical lies, but out and out lies). It is not misinformation, it is false information with a veneer of credibility because it is taught by activists parading as “professors.” So, the State of Florida is no longer willing to pay to indoctrinate its youth – this isn’t free speech, this is LIES. If those FL and now TX professors want to petition the government or speak in the public square and spout their lies, fine, they have that right. They are not, however, being stripped of a right in their classrooms, because lying to kids and getting paid by the State to do it is not their right.

      How anyone can be a proponent of crt or die on a logical, ethical, or honest basis is simply not possible. But if you like poking at whitey, do it on your own time and dime.

      1. Neil Bobacon,
        Well said.
        As I have stated many a time here on the good professor’s blog, I am not white.
        But I agree with your statement, ” But if you like poking at whitey, do it on your own time and dime.”
        I would just add, not just whitey, but those of us brown types who still have a degree of common sense and critical thinking.

    2. Dennis McIntyre, as I recall you were one of the ones who told us that Critical Race was not being taught in our schools. At the time I presented this link by The National Education Association that proves that they do recommend the teaching of CRT in our classrooms. https://web.archive.org/web/20210705090534/https://ra.nea.org/business-item/2021-nbi-039/. You never responded. On the current subject I have but one question for you. Do you believe that the police should be brought in to police what can and cannot be said. A simple yes or no will suffice but due to past experience is not expected. My personal opinion based on your comment is that you do believe that bringing in the police to stop speech is how you would have it.

    3. Dennis – There is an obvious distinction between what a person says in public to the public and what that person says to captive students in the schoolroom. In the former role, the person is a citizen protected by the 1st Amendment. In the latter role, the person is acting as agent of the school, the governing board, the state legistature and the parents to provide teach courses established by the school which are viewed, in the opinion of the foregoing, to be in the best interests of the students.

      1. edwardmahl: What a teacher presents as course material is not to “captive students in the schoolroom”. The SC ruled years ago that that students have 1st Amendment rights even in the classroom. That means that if they want to learn about the history if racism that is their right. But under Gov. Desantis’ anti-woke law that is becoming impossible. Professor Joeckel is a case study of how that controversy is being played out. Palm Beach Atlantic University is a private conservative Christian university. Joeckel says he taught his unit on “racial justice” for 12 years without objection from the administration. That changed with DeSantis’ law that prohibits the teaching of courses like that of Joeckel. In a petition by over 500 former students and others concerned about the issue said Joeckel’s “course materials include works from Black authors and civil rights activists. The school wants to fire Dr. Joeckel for teaching these materials and educating students about the realities of racism in America…there is nobody who cares more for the life and intellectual wellbeing of his students more than Dr. Samuel Joeckel”. It doesn’t appear Joeckel’s course involved “indoctrination” as the administration now claims. That’s just the excuse the administration will use if they fire him. Now the University could support Joeckel by opposing DeSantis and his campaign against “wokeism”. But the University has apparently decided otherwise in the face of the wrath of DeSantis.

        The point of my earlier comment is that Turley has a double standard when it comes to “free speech”. He supports the right of Prof. Lowery who opposes the CRT or DEI programs at Texas University while being strangely silent when teachers are silenced in FL schools, have to practice self-censorship and where hundreds of books have been banned. Don’t you believe that is equally an important “free speech” issue?

    4. Dennis, you seem to be conflating freedom of speech and freedom to create your own curriculum.

  5. If you think they’re not dangerous then think again. I have often stated on this blog that it begins with censorship and escalates to the use of force. Here is a perfect example of the left calling in the Jackboots to do their biding. Rest assured this is not just a local college movement but extends to the U.S. Congress members who say that social media is not censoring enough and that China got it right in its control of what the public can see. All of this was going on under the table until a man came along and revealed the smell of the swamp. He was right all along and the swamp creatures hate him for it.

  6. So the leftist Professors created the rules that make them afraid that they might make a misstep and be cancelled. They put the egg shells on the floor thinking that only conservatives would step on them and now they find themselves walking on tippy toes in fear that the too might hear the crunch. If it wasn’t so sad it would be funny. You reap what you sow. Stomped on by their own boot. How can they be so smart and so stupid at the same time.

  8. “Building Equity” in America used to hold a different connotation.

    “We are five days away from fundamentally transforming the United States of America.”

    President Susan Rice is following “Crazy Abe” Lincoln, seizing power and forcing “EQUITY” on America, whether it comports with and adheres to the Constitution or not.

      1. All men are created equal; after creation, all men are left to the equality created of their own devices.

        Equity is a natural state of freedom in which success is neither provided nor guaranteed, and in which failure is a distinct possibility.

        Merriam-Webster: Equity – The absence of bias or favoritism.

        “Equity” as described by Community Organizer Barack Obama and his Prime Sycophant, President Susan Rice, turns out to be the generous provision of “free stuff” from other people’s money, the many multiple forms of affirmative action, etc., ad infinitum.

  9. Self-censoring will now be enforced within all federal agencies with Biden’s latest EO, which places political Red Guards within every agency, answerable to a DEI czar. This is what happens when the permanent political class in DC becomes subservient, through itsr own corruption, to a ruling state (in this case, the CCP in China). Everything about this fake president is performative, right down to the fake air raid sirens in Kiev yesterday.

    1. REGARDING ABOVE:

      The comment above, by our staff writer, illustrates why these threads are hard to take seriously.

      Terms like “Red Guards” and “DEI Czar” give this piece an over-the-top-strictly-for Trumpers quality like it was crafted by some nerd trying desperately to sound hip and defiant.

      1. Anonymous when they’re bringing in the police to enforce their censorship comparisons to Red Guards Czars are not out of order. They are asking the police to look for a crime. https://www.pinterest.com/pin/389983648959032856/. You bring me the man I’ll show you the crime. The comparison is justified. At the same time, another Sustainability Institute employee, Madison Gove, emailed UT police officer Joseph Bishop, to ask for police surveillance of Lowery’s public statements.

      2. Anonymous, I find it rich that you now warn us of the hyperbolic use of the “Red Scare” when you used the “Russia Russia Russia” hoax for five years. I understand. Once again you just didn’t think about it.

          1. Maybe, but guess what happened…nothing. Linking a President to a nation is not against the law.

            the bidens linked themselves to Ukraine and now 250,000 ukrainians are dead and we’ve pissed away 10s of billions to bidens friends and contributors.

            1. Neil Bobacon,
              Good observation.
              I would add, the Biden Crime Family would have us on the verge of WWII or nuclear Armageddon to protect themselves.

          2. Anonymous cover it if you will but you are the one who has used the “Red Guards” tactic for five years. You, Claire McCaskill and Adam Schiff are still saying that Republicans are Putin puppets. When a person on the left calls in the police to enforce the limitation of speech your all in on it. We know that the Chinese and Russians call in the police to enforce speech codes and it seems that you are all for it. This comparison is not misplaced.

          3. I can remember when Anonymous was calling everyone that she didn’t agree with a stooge. It went on for about three weeks. Now Anonymous is saying that anyone who does not agree with her is actually only one person. Its been going on for about a week now. One might come to the conclusion that it lingers on the edge of obsession.

            1. I have noticed the shift in tactics.
              On some of the good professor’s topics, the DNC Leftist operatives can just read and attack without direction from their DNC overlords immediately with 20-30 comments at the get go.
              Other times, when the subject is beyond their mental capacity, they wait for direction for hours to comment, but mostly posting DNC talking points.
              All else fails, misinformation, disinformation, or repeating their old lies, generally reduced to Fox News, Trump or something along those lines.
              Other times, the comment not at all. As they have no logical argument to present.
              As to the assertion that we are all only but one person, Estvior (more on that later), could be an attempt to imply that those who comment on the good professor’s blog are few and far in between. That we do not have our own independent, critical thinking mind. That we try to conflate our numbers to appear we are many. Kinda sounds like what she is trying to do. Difference is, we clearly are the many. We are those who choose to push back against their narrative. We are those who will not go silently into the night. We, we shall rage.
              Her single focus on Estovir is rather interesting. Could it be to do something with his religious beliefs? The fact he is a minority, but a religious conservative in the medical field?
              Seems almost personal, dont you think?

    2. DETERMINE THE LEGITIMACY OF THE ACTS OF THE EXECUTIVE AND LEGISLATIVE BRANCHES

      And “Political Officers” in every nook and cranny of society.

      Where is the necessary and proper Judicial Review?
      __________________________________________

      Judicial Review in the United States

      Annotation
      The legitimacy of judicial review and the judge’s approach to judicial review are discussed.

      Abstract
      The doctrine of judicial review holds that the courts are vested with the authority to determine the legitimacy of the acts of the executive and the legislative branches of government.

      – U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs

  10. I’m old enough to remember when we had to use persuasion, logic and empirical evidence to get people to agree with an argument. Now all you have to do is call the police.

  11. “police surveillance of Lowery’s public statements” — folks, we are way beyond 1984. This is the Twilight Zone, and it won’t get better from here with any of the politicians who now inhabit DC.

  12. Trump Seeks To Visit Ohio Spill Site Before Biden

    But Awkward Questions Could Arise

    Donald Trump is today heading to East Palestine, Ohio, where a Norfolk Southern train carrying toxic chemicals derailed earlier this month, causing an environmental disaster and an intensifying political firestorm. Trump wants to seize the initiative from Joe Biden, who Republicans have criticized for not visiting the Ohio town, though he did dispatch his Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) chief. But Trump, who is running for president once again, may have questions of his own to answer in East Palestine. During his four years in the White House, he loosened up safety regulations for rail operators, and tried to curb the EPA’s powers.

    From:

    Trump to face questions on environmental record in visit to Ohio toxic train crash

    Today’s The Guardian

    1. Non sequitur but the deregulation narrative is collapsing in real time. The derailment is appearing to be due to axel failure and not anything associated with the braking system.
      It is all too common for the Biden Administration to falsely try to deflect all its failures on the previous one.

      Vaccines
      Afghanistan
      Spy balloons
      Ukraine
      East Palestine

      1. Estovir, let’s see confirmation from an established source.

        And even if it was an axel failure, that doesn’t exonerate Trump’s hostility to the EPA.

        1. You are obnoxious as phuuck. Youre supposed to represent us liberals? Do us a favor: light a tampon on fire and insert in your piehole. It will save all of humanity from your cray cray

          1. Estovir,

            “Us liberals”..??? Since when are ‘you’ a liberal???

            What a stupid attempt at gas-lighting!

      2. ti317,
        Right you are.
        The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) Chair Jennifer Homendy, tweeted, “anyone speculating about what happened, didn’t happen, or should’ve happened is misleading a suffering community – PLEASE STOP SPREADING MISINFORMATION. For example… Some are saying the ECP (electronically controlled pneumatic) brake rule, if implemented, would’ve prevented this derailment. FALSE – here’s why… The ECP braking rule would’ve applied ONLY to HIGH HAZARD FLAMMABLE TRAINS. The train that derailed in East Palestine was a MIXED FREIGHT TRAIN containing only 3 placarded Class 3 flammable liquids cars. This means even if the rule had gone into effect, this train wouldn’t have had ECP brakes.”

        1. Upstate– as usual, the truth is such a pesky thing. No wonder the forces of darkness are working so hard to stamp out alternative sources of information, and no wonder that some who comment on this blog never let the truth (or reality) stand in the way of their talking points.

          1. honestlawyermostly,
            Well said.
            I find the federal governments action or should I say reaction to be disappointing in this case. Does not matter what the Trump admin did, swift action from FEMA, the EPA, Transportation secretary Pete Buttigieg and even the Biden Admin. Do the right thing. They should of immediately offered assistance to local and state government, aid to the townspeople.
            Biden flying to meet with Zelensky and promise millions if not billions in aid and all but ignore the people in East Palestine is, as the mayor of East Palestine put it,
            “. . . biggest slap in the face . . .”

            2. The Biden administration and most leftists do not care about the American people. It is not just a slap in the face. This is how they intend to treat everyone but themselves should they ever gain absolute power.

              1. S. Meyer,
                Hard to argue against that.
                And that is why I would not be surprised for them to manufacture a crisis (economic, WWIII, civil unrest, etc.) declare some kind of emergency and impose . . . whatever, to maintain power.
                Sound like a conspiracy theory?
                See government reaction to COVID.

        1. The time to blame Bush was eight years of the Obama Administration. After that, it shifted to Trump. Get with the program or else I’m calling the cops.

        2. Joe Biden just signed an executive order, permanently lifting the statute of limitations on Trump blaming. The Antichrist hailed it “a huge step forward for equity and social justice.”

    2. Anonymous – According to a tweet from Pete Buttigieg: “We’re constrained by law on some areas of rail regulation (like the braking rule withdrawn by the Trump administration in 2018 because of a law passed by Congress in 2015), but we are using the powers we do have to keep people safe.” It appears that the undisclosed braking rule did not have anything to do with the accident, since it supposedly applied only to hazardous chemicals; but, even if it did apply to this situation, the responsibility for its withdrawal seems to lie with Congress, not Trump. Of course, Trump is to blame for everything.

    3. loosened up safety regulations for rail operators, and tried to curb the EPA’s powers.

      This is exactly like the “51 intelligence officials say”

      It makes an accusation, but never actually makes an accusation. “loosened”? “curb” ? powers and regulations?
      This means NOTHING, because the accuser cannot be pinned down on details.

  13. “It has been common for critics to claim that a conservative faculty member is threatening the safety of colleagues or students by voicing dissenting views of subjects like CRT or DEI.”
    Why?
    By being critical of their theories just might challenge them to think? To not blindly accept? Maybe even question?
    Or would that be threatening to the foundation of things like CRT or DEI?

    1. Two reasons.

      1. They project their own would-be reaction onto others, they always project.

      2. They know that the victimhood narrative sells to middle class white women.

        1. Many of them didn’t start out ‘liberals’ unfortunately, which is why the left uses the rhetoric.

          The need of these women to conform is very powerful. We need more Grrrrrlllllssss and less conformist pussy hats.

  14. “. . . Sustainability Institute employee, Madison Gove, emailed UT police officer Joseph Bishop, to ask for police surveillance of Lowery’s public statements.”

    Here, again, is the Left’s naked use of physical force to intimidate and silence dissenters. Civilized individuals appeal to evidence, arguments, reason to settle disputes. Barbarians and brutes (like the modern Left) use a club.

  15. Yes Sue them they will win especially in Texas Hit the Woke and Left in pocket book the one stes they don’t like and will get their attention

  16. Is it any wonder that the proponents of morally and intellectually bankrupt ideas like CRT and DEI must force others to accept them, even to the point of threatening their careers? The proponents of such things do not build, they destroy and because of this they are a blight on civilized society. I feel sorry for the millions of minorities who have succeeded on their own merit without having to espouse a false history or grab a special place at the head of the line. Ignoring their accomplishments is the real racism of our time.

    1. “The proponents of such things do not build, they destroy . . .”

      That is spot on!

      To which I’d add: The *only* way they survive is by the sanction of the good. For example: Without the support of American corporations, DEI is DOA. Without the support of alumni, science profs (by their silence), and sundry donors, CRT is DOA in academia.

  17. Sounds like the FBI needs to send a dozen or two FBI agents to the University to “help” them enforce their written charter.

  19. Frankfurt was the first university the Nazis tackled, precisely because it was the most self-confidently liberal of major German universities, with a faculty that prided itself on its allegiance to scholarship, freedom of conscience, and democracy. The Nazis knew that control of Frankfurt University would mean control of German academia. And so did everyone at the university.

  20. It’s a shame that people have to litigate that which the Founding Fathers thought they had made abundantly clear with the inclusion of the Bill of Rights.

Comments are closed.