The anti-free speech movement in the United States was largely an outgrowth of higher education where viewpoint intolerance has taken hold of many schools. Indeed, intolerance and orthodoxy are often defended on the left in the name of tolerance and pluralism. Harvard Professor Timothy McCarthy is one of those voices demanding the removal of faculty with opposing views in the name of tolerance. He recently told New York University’s Washington Square News that any faculty who do not support “gender-affirming care” should be stripped of their academic titles and fired.
Many academics and citizens oppose “gender-affirming” policies on religious or other grounds. Some believe that school-enforced policies inhibit debate over gender dysphoria and the basis for various treatments and protections on both sides. McCarthy believes that no such debate should be allowed among faculty, declaring that “there’s a particular place in hell for academics who use their academic expertise and power to distort and do violence to people in the world.” He was targeting two professors at NYU who are affiliated with groups critical of surgical and chemical interventions for gender dysphoria.
Professor McCarthy offered the usual nod to free speech and academic freedom before eviscerating both in his comments. He admitted that “a level of suspicion and inquiry into medical practices is healthy,” but then dismissed such views as harmful and mere efforts to “poison the waters.”
There was a time when such intolerance was directed against the left and groups ranging from feminists to those in the LGBT community. Now, it has become a badge of honor, the expected bona fides that show the correctness and firmness of one’s views.
The irony is crushing. Harvard’s Kennedy School website states that McCarthy “was the first openly gay faculty member” at the public policy school “and still teaches the school’s only course on LGBTQ matters.” When I first went into teaching, I had friends who still remained in the closet out of fear that their sexual orientation would undermine their chances for tenure or advancement. Likewise, far-left academics associated with the critical legal studies (CLS) movement were viewed as “poisoning the waters” of higher education and often blocked from teaching.
The left has now adopted the same intolerance and orthodoxy once used against it. Indeed, it has been far more successful in purging the faculty ranks of conservatives, libertarians, and dissenters. As we have previously discussed, Harvard is particularly notorious for this purging of both its faculty and student body.
This year, Harvard again found itself dead last among 251 universities and colleges in the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE) annual ranking.
The Harvard Crimson has documented how the school’s departments have virtually eliminated Republicans. In one study of multiple departments last year, they found that more than 75 percent of the faculty self-identified as “liberal” or “very liberal.”
Only 5 percent identified as “conservative,” and only 0.4% as “very conservative.”
According to Gallup, the U.S. population is roughly equally divided among conservatives (36%), moderates (35%), and liberals (26%).
So, Harvard has three times the number of liberals as the nation at large, and less than three percent identify as “conservative” rather than 35 percent nationally.
According to the last student survey, only 9 percent of the class identified as conservative or very conservative.
Notably, despite Harvard’s maintenance of an overwhelmingly liberal faculty and student body, even liberal students feel stifled at Harvard. Only 41 percent of liberal students reported being comfortable discussing controversial topics, and only 25 percent of moderates and 17 percent of conservatives felt comfortable in doing so.
Among law school faculty who donated more than $200 to a political party, 91 percent of the Harvard faculty gave to Democrats.
Professor McCarthy appears right at home in his public call for a further purging of faculty ranks.
This is an area that has deeply divided the country, as was evident in the last election. Higher education should play a critical role in that debate by allowing faculty and students to engage with each other in civil and substantive debate. Instead of spending so much time and effort trying to silence those with opposing views, the left could instead focus on refuting these claims. Instead, it is replicating that same pattern of cancellations, deplatformings and firings that marked the last decade. It is the same approach used against academics who questioned aspects of COVID policies including mask efficacy doubts, natural immunity theories, opposition to the closing of schools, opposition to the six-foot rule, and the lab theory on the virus’s origin. They were also removed from faculties and associations. Yet, many of these views have since been vindicated.
What was lost was not just free speech and academic freedom, but a rigorous debate that might have helped us avoid some of the costs of unsupported COVID policies. For example, some of our closest allies listened to skeptics on the need to close schools and opted to keep young children in school. They were able to avoid the massive educational and psychological costs that we incurred in this country. Much like Professor McCarthy, these skeptics were accused of “poisoning the waters” and spreading harmful ideas or disinformation.
There is no difference between the intolerance of figures like Professor McCarthy from those who once sought the same measures against liberals, homosexuals, or feminists. Now firmly in control of higher education, many on the left are using their power to win public debate through retribution, coercion, and attrition. In the process, they are destroying the very essense of higher education for not just our students but ourselves.
Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro professor of public interest law at George Washington University and the author of “The Indispensable Right: Free Speech in an Age of Rage.”
Top to bottom educational reform is called for, and I do not have any issue whatsoever with starting with the dept. of ed. Kill it. It does not need to exist.
Further, I used to believe in unions for certain professions (teachers, nurses, factory workers, et. al. – there actually was a time when the ability to strike was relevant, and that time is long, long, gone in most cases when people don’t come to work because of ‘feelings’) because some institutions warranted the protections due to the levels of imbalance within the organizations. Like everything else the modern left has touched, they have been perverted into nothing more than a veritable mafia for ideals in direct opposition to our laws and Constitution, and worse, to further the entitlement mindset of so many, particularly in our younger workers.
If America were founded today, we’d be Europe in the grip of the Spanish Inquisition circa 1500, not a bastion of freedom for whomever has the grit to try. Real, honest freedom absolutely terrifies some, because it requires great personal responsibility, both in action and mentality, and then one must balance it all with fairness. These are traits that are sorely lacking in many if not most in 2025; who have grown accustomed to too much effortless comfort, IMO, for myriad reasons.
America is leading the way out of the darkness *again*. Never thought we’d have to, but here we are.
James
Just disconnect all education from Government funding.
That is all that is necescary.
If parents wish to pay for this nonsense.
If donors wish to pay for it
That is fine.
But govenrment should not pay for it
and government money should not insulate institutions from those who fund them.
@John Say
I do not disagree.
Article 1, Section 8, allows no taxation and funding for, or regulation of, education.
Please cite a legal basis for the Dept. of Education.
Congress may technically establish the agency by legislation but it cannot sustain it.
Executive power is vested in a President.
Gay, Trans, Lesbian, I could care less, it’s your life, just don’t ask for special benefits or considerations and especially do not foster your sexual proclivities to the innocents among us.
This issue is one amongst many reasons the Democrat Party is free falling into the abyss of irrelevance. Who wants to listen to ignorant speech or consider the foolish notions of their panacea(s)?
@George W
Very much agreed, live and let live. But leave kids out of it. Young children do not need to be thinking about sex AT ALL, in any form. Ditto for racism, a trait they do not possess until they are taught. That is not a healthy part of a child’s reality or development, and we’ve been here before with some of the dross of the 1960s and 70s.
I could care less what someone decides to do after 21, it’s their life, and they should live it as they are guided to. That kind of self-reflection that includes a certain level of integrated maturity is a very different matter from imposing personal grievance or insular and individual preferences on the part of adults.
“MR. MCBRIDE’S FANTASY”
After referring to Democratic Rep. Sarah McBride of Delaware as “Mr. McBride” during a congressional hearing this week,
Rep. Keith Self, R-Texas, said he is not obligated to engage in McBride’s “fantasy.”
_________________________________________________________________________________________
It’s not “gender-affirming care,” it’s indicated psychotherapy.
These people are unstable and overcome by pathology.
Does Representative Sarah McBride (D, DE) menstruate?
Does Representative Sarah McBride (D, DE) have ovaries, fallopian tubes, and a uterus?
Did Representative Sarah McBride (D, DE) have a hysterectomy?
Does Representative Sarah McBride (D, DE) have XX chromosomes?
I do not personally care about McBride.
What I care about is McBride’s efforts to use FORCE against others.
I may personally CHOSE to call McBride she or them or whatever McBride wishes.
But I am NOT obligated to and atempting to do so is a violation of MY rights.
Each of us is free to “identify” as we please, and each of us is free to “identify” others as we please.
If Rep. Self wishes to call McBride “Mr”. he MUST be free to do so.
Just as he is free to call Rep. Nadler “ms.”
How did McBride use force? Asking is using force? Common courtesy perhaps?
Deliberate misgendering is intended as an insult. I’m sure if we started calling male congressmen Mrs. and Ms. everytime it wouldnt’ be long before they would make it a rule to address them correctly. Force?
Harvard isn’t part of the problem, Harvard IS the problem.
Fuggem
Harvard isn’t education; Harvard is indoctrination.
The freedom of the American Founders required no indoctrination.
The “dictatorship of the proletariat” of Karl Marx will “wither on the vine” and die without it.
What would be the average person’s opinion of someone who said:
If I can’t get my penis and testicles cut off, I will kill myself!
If I can’t get my breasts cut off, I will kill myself!
If I can’t get someone to make me a surgical penis, I will kill myself!
If I can’t get Suzie to be my girlfriend, I will kill myself!
If the Cherokee Indian Tribe doesn’t accept me as a member, I will kill myself!
If I have to go through puberty, I will kill myself!
If everybody doesn’t agree that I am Napoleon, I will kill myself!
Floyd,
Go ahead?
Gender or sex-correlated attributes (e.g. sexual orientation). Harvard is calling for transgender spectrum affirming policies. All’s fair in lust and abortion? Sure, why not.
Turley’s avoidance of the Khalil case is astounding. The biggest anti-free speech crack down by Trump and Turley is absent. It is Turley who is first to criticize government censorship and attacks on free speech, it’s his pasion, and now he’s silent when the government literally arrested someone for exercising their free speech right to criticize government, political speech.
Turley speaking at a book fair about his book on free speech and he ignores this case? I hope he’s asked about his thoughts on the Khalil case or why he hasn’t written about it yet. What is he waiting for. We know he’s a prolific writer when it comes to anything free speech related, at least when it involves the left. Is there a clause in his Fox News contract that he can’t criticize the Trump administration?
Trump is using threats and intimidation to chill the speech of universities and students who protest against Israel and Turley is dead quiet. The stench of hypocrisy is starting to well up.
You are free to protest Israel. You are not free to disrupt classes and other students to destroy property, and to assault police or other students.
The Nazi’s peacefully marched through Skokie – they did not occupy building shut down the town destroy property and beat up jews.
Pro Hamas protestors did.
I would further note that Hamas is a designated terrorist organization – providing monetary support to them or receiving monetary support from them is actually a crime.
I do not know the evidence that DOJ/State have regarding Khalil – but it is already self evidently more than DOJ had against many J6’s that were not even at the capitol.
Those of you on the left – including DOJ courts and juries in DC convicted people merely for organizing the J6 protests – even though there was no prior advocacy of violence. Even though they sought to organize a protected by the first amendment free speech protest.
But in left wing looney world – you think that the campus violence was acceptable ?
John, George doesn’t want to know the difference between free speech and what the Hamas loving, Jew hating, class canceling, library closing foreigner has done.
Hullbobby, what exactly did he do? Even you can’t name exactly what he did. What was the crime?
Disrupting a class is not a crime. Other people getting violent is not evidence he did. So what exactly did he do other than engage in political speech and organize a protest?
John Say,
Well said.
John, what you didn’t say is why Khalil isn’t charged with any crime.
You did not say whether he committed violence or committed any crime. He engaged in political speech and Trump had him arrested and wants to deport him just for expressing his views.
“I do not know the evidence that DOJ/State have regarding Khalil – but it is already self evidently more than DOJ had against many J6’s that were not even at the capitol.”
You don’t know jack squat but you want to punish him for who he is absent any crime and you are trying to excuse the governmnent for arresting someone for political speech.
J6 protesters filmed themnselves committing crimes and self identified when they were tresspassing on government property. The DOJ had evidence linkng them directly of conspiring to storm the capitol. What did Khalil do? You don’t have an answer and neither does Trump’s DOJ, ICE, and DHS.
Even you can’t pinpoint exactly why he was arrested. It’s irrelevant if Hamas is a terrorist organization and he wasn’t supporting Hamas. Palestinians aren’t Hamas.
“ Those of you on the left – including DOJ courts and juries in DC convicted people merely for organizing the J6 protests – even though there was no prior advocacy of violence“
That’s not true. Merely organizing protests is different from organizing illegal trespass intentionally and having evidence directly linking you to it. The difference is the DOJ and the FBI has evidence linking the organizers directly. Right? Trump’s DOJ has nothing but allegations and zero charges to date.
What you are not saying is Khalil committed anything and he’s been arrested. He was arrested for exercising his right to free speech. Trump didn’t like that the protesters were critical of the students anti-Israel position. He wants retaliation and that is precisely why we have the 1st amendment. Right now he’s actively seeking to deport students who only expressed their views against Israel and wants to punish that by threatening to deport them. It’s an attack on free speech and you know it.
Trump screwed up and Turley knows it. That’s why he is staying silent and avoiding any criticism of a clear attack on free speech. He’s hoping he won’t have to to avoid the MAGA backlash if he eventually does.
George, like Dennis, Gigi and Anonymous, never addresses the issue at hand because he, and they, are always on the wrong side of it.
Hey Geo(USAID)rge, learn the difference between a) free speech and taking over buildings, closing libraries, canceling classes and banning Jews from campus and b) citizens and green card holders.
The issue is free speech. Turley talks about it in both columns today and the biggest issue right now is the Khalil case where the Trump administration is actively attacking free speech by arresting students because they are critical of Israel. Turley is strangely silent when Trump attacks free speech, it seems he is quietly condoning it.
“The issue is free speech. “
Free speech is not the issue. It is Khalil’s actions and intent that count. Being critical of Israel is not the issue, and if you weren’t a fool, you would immediately realize that. It is Khalil’s direct and indirect support for terrorists that count, and the laws on that subject are clear. His actions, as portrayed by the media, make him a danger to America, and since he is not a citizen, he should be deported.
In fact, the Muslim Brotherhood should be declared a terrorist organization and anyone providing support to that organization or its tentacles. To make it clear, CAIR is a part of the Muslim Brotherhood, along with its many arms that are actively rioting on college campuses. Get rid of the Muslim Brotherhood, and that can end many of the problems we face now or will face in the future. Many Arab nations declared the Muslim Brotherhood a terrorist organization a long time ago.
Hello S. Meyer: re: your first paragraph. You are definitely on the right track.
(second para, I cannot comment on as I know little of Muslim Brotherhood)
Lin, thanks. I think the Muslim Brotherhood is an important group to understand. They are the ones who wrote they will ‘destroy the West from within.’ They are lethal and are responsible for most of the Muslim atrocities on our citizens and in the Western nations. That is not an aspersion against the Islamic faith. Many in the Arab countries will say worse about them.
https://www.investigativeproject.org/documents/20/an-explanatory-memorandum-on-the-general.pdf
Above is the site with copies of the Declaration in Arabic and English. If you scan it quickly, use the bold print and also go to page 4.
We urged and were hoping that the Republican Party, the first time Trump ran, would include in the platform that the Muslim Brotherhood was a terrorist organization. They have much money and tentacles extending to CAIR and the US campuses and our politicians. They are aggressive. You might remember that they were responsible for killing Anwar Sadat. They are linked to killing Christians and terrorism all over the world.
The Muslim Brotherhood is banned in Egypt, Saudi Arabia, UAE, Bahrain, Russia and elsewhere.
You should know some words: Sharia, taqiyya, Ikhwan, and dhimmi.
There is too little discussion about Muslim extremism and how that ties into the left, even though many on the left would be killed in Muslim lands for their actions.
S. Meyer, what direct support for terrotists? The government has no evidence. Allegations are not evidence.
What actions are you specifically referring to? Nobody can pinpoint exactly what he did that is a crime.
What’s the danger he is posing?
Organizing a protest is not a crime. Criticizing Israel isn’t a crime either.
At the end of the blurb we find a third running through LaGuardia Airport to get out of the country before being detained. Are the rats leaving the ship?
—
Second anti-Israel Columbia protester, Leqaa Kordia, arrested by Homeland Security for immigration violations — as third self-deports and flees to Canada
By Published March 14, 2025, 12:35 p.m. ET
A second protester who took part in anti-Israel demonstrations at Columbia University has been nabbed by immigration officials, who also revoked the visa of another student “for advocating for violence and terrorism,” sources said Friday.
Leqaa Kordia, a Palestinian who hails from the West Bank, was busted by Homeland Security agents Thursday for alleged immigration violations related to overstaying on an expired student visa, the sources said.
Kordia — who was turned over to Immigration and Customs Enforcement in Newark, New Jersey — was first arrested in April 2024 for taking part in one of the protests on Columbia’s campus while overstaying on her twice-canceled student visa, according to the sources.
A third Columbia protester, Indian citizen Ranjani Srinivasan — a doctoral student in urban planning at the Ivy League university and a teaching fellow at Barnard College — was seen in dramatic video obtained by The Post running through LaGuardia Airport as she self-deported from the US for Canada on Tuesday.
https://nypost.com/2025/03/14/us-news/second-anti-israel-columbia-protester-leqaa-kordia-arrested-by-homeland-security-for-immigration-violations/?utm_source=sailthru&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=news_alert&utm_content=20250314?&utm_source=sailthru&lctg=62680bbe38a279b1870b18c5&utm_term=NYP%20-%20News%20Alerts
George, you are so right! You know, Turley is definitely a POS hypocrite, and if I were you, I would stop reading his posts, and stop commenting here! That’ll show him!
Floyd,
Good one!
Floyd, it’s a free speech forum. Turley is a huge free speech supporter and when Trump is actively attacking free speech in the most obvious way he stays silent?
What’s the point of advocating for free speech if you only defend it when it involves the left or democrats? Clearly Turley is being a hypocrite.
Khalil is not an anti-free speech case, it is an egregious violation of entry rules case, which this Hamas agent lost on the merits before it even hit the docket.
What did he violate? He wasn’t on a student visa when he was arrested. So what crime did he commit? That seems to be the problem for Trump’s DHS and Rubio. They can’t articulate exaclty what it is that he committed. Vague insinutations that he supports Hamas are not enough. He hasn’t been charged. So why was he arrested?
Asked and answered, but the low IQ bozo doesn’t respond to the answer even though he never stops asking for one.
No, it wasn’t answered. Vague references that Khalil did something illegal without being able to specify exactly what he did is not an answer. It shows you don’t have evidence that he committed a crime. Speaking against Israel is not evidence of supporting terrorism. That’s protected speech. You can’t show what exactly did he do that constitutes a crime.
Of course, it was answered many times, and some of those answers included evidence. The only question is whether the evidence is strong enough to remove Khalil from the country.
You keep arguing because you have the Dunning-Kruger effect personality. You immediately think you know all the facts before the information is released and have concluded he did nothing wrong. You don’t even know you must wait for the evidence to find the truth.
“Speaking against Israel is not evidence “
No one claimed Khalil’s speaking against Israel is evidence. I believe all have not commented or denied it. Khalil’s problems stem from any relationships he has, direct and indirect, with Hamas and terrorism.
You already said all this at 11:36.
Dementia setting in?
Seriously? Khalil is not a “free speech” case. Supporting a designated terrorist group is not “free speech”, particularly when you are not a U.S. citizen. Most of you guys are simply superficial thinkers, at best.
You don’t have to be a citizen to have the right to free speech as long as you are in this country. Everyone within our borders have free speech rights.
Khalil was not supporting Hamas. The only people saying that are conservatives and Republicans upset that Khalils is critical of Israel. He supports the Palestinians and even if he voiced support to Hamas it is not a crime. It’s no different than voicing support for the KKK or Neo-Nazis. It’s still protected political speech.
You don’t want to say he supports the Palestinians because that would be much harder to justify an arrest or even a deportation. The government has zero evidence that he committed any crime and vague insinuations that he may be supporting a terrorist group without clear concrete evidence are not going to fly in court.
Every single person within our borders has a right to free speech and that includess foreigners and students on visas.
Ivy League elite academia has long believed it is the nations intelligentsia and fifth branch of government and therefore what professors, protected by tenure, say carries the weight and power of law. We are expected to just accept or be punished, fired, or suffer for thinking outside their narrow, hateful box. They prove just how intellectually stunted, ignorant, and boring they are.
I have an opposing viewpoint. Any Harvard Faculty or staff member who supports so-called “gender-affirming care” ought to be fired.
Support the “crazy!”
Great idea…or not.
The vote must be restricted.
The society of laws of the American Founders must be reestablished.
Why?
Sometimes we miss the fine print (here, a case footnote No. 3), which can add so much to our understanding.
I looked up and reviewed the case highlighted in yesterday’s column by the good professor (about parents’ not being informed by school of their child’s proclivity or declaration toward transgenderism).
There, in Footnote 3, I found the following (I also am including the decision’s sentences preceding the footnote, for contextual understanding):
“…Early in the 2020-21 school year, sixth-grade students at Baird, including eleven-year-old B.F. (“the Student”), were given an assignment by the school’s librarian to create biographic videos about themselves. According to the Parents’ complaint, the librarian, Jordan Funke, encouraged students to include their pronouns in their videos…
“Funke, the school librarian, spoke with the Student one-on-one about gender identity and provided the Student with LGBTQ-related resources. And Counselor Foley told the Student that they could choose which bathroom to use — boys’, girls’, or the gender-neutral facilities at the school….3.
“fn 3. The Student’s twelve-year-old sibling attended Baird Middle School at the same time as the Student. Around the same time as the above-described events were playing out, the Student’s sibling also started using a name and pronouns differing from those provided to the sibling at birth.”
I am carefully cleaning the ears of my dog (a brittany). Almost immediately, the other dog (english springer spaniel, -just months old) comes up and wants me to do the same for him– I have not cleaned his ears yet.)
Take from this what you may.
Relate this to today’s discussion of faculty as you wish.
Lin,
Very interesting. Thank you for bringing that to our attention.
“There is no difference between the intolerance of figures like Professor McCarthy from those who once sought the same measures against liberals, homosexuals, or feminists. Now firmly in control of higher education, many on the left are using their power to win public debate through retribution, coercion, and attrition. In the process, they are destroying the very essense of higher education for not just our students but ourselves.”
*************************
Part of the radicalized anti-family, anti-male gay agenda that is driving so much of our turmoil and cultural revolution and to which MAGA provides a counter-revolution. It’s no coincidence that leftist leaders like Obama, Starmer, Macron and Trudeau have all had serious questions raised about their close affinity for gay and trans causes. “Great men are often bad men” as Lord Acton used to say and how bad they really are is never a surprise to anyone with a history book and a few hours to spare.
Support the “crazy!”
Great idea…or not.
The vote must be severely restricted.
The society of laws of the American Founders must be reestablished.
McCarthy’s comments are a good lesson in extremes and why to avoid them. The formerly oppressed will go into the revenge purge mode when the pendulum swings in their direction. It is ironic that McCarthy has become McCarthy.
I suggest that Prof. McCarthy follow the science re “gender-affirming” care because he would see that such care is only weekly supported in the literature given the small cohort size and lack of control in the studies that do exist.
There is no evidence – even with the poor studies the left touts of any benefit from these medical interventions – I would note that “Gender Affriming care: is a euphamism, for drugs and surgery. Teens are already awash in hormones. – pretty much the last thing they need is some idiot giving them drugs to supress some hormones and enhance others.
The very claim that something is wrong is disproven by the interventions themselves. There bodies are producing sex hormones consistent with their genetics and biology. While some early sex differentiation occurs in the first year, for the most part humans from about 2-12 are “gender neutral” there are few biological differences until near the start of puberty sex hormones kick in. A child can not claim a sexual identity until AFTER that process has completed. prior to the start of production of sex hormones most aspects of human sexuality are muted to near nonexistance.
Hormone theraphy for kids that do not have a clear hormonal problem is a violation of the hypocratic oath. And surgery is much worse.
It is odds that left wing nuts who worship nature are in this instance so clearly attempting to destroy nature.
Adults are free to make their own choices – including bad ones. Kids are not.
Finally – even in the left wing nut studies – there was no effect on suicidal ideation. There is some evidence that suicides increase, There is no mental health benefit.
I would think that “men are men, women are women” is very clearly gender-affirming!
What the Harvard professor actually wants is to deny gender instead.
“Gender affirming” is a euphemism for delusion-affirming. Such “care” is cruel.
Exhibit A: “Rachel” Levine.
I was going to say that! Or, insanity affirming” care. Great minds.
So, now that America has reached “crazy,” what do rational constitutional Americans do?
Support the “crazy!”
Great idea…or not.
The society of laws and severely restricted government of the American Founders must be reestablished.
The vote must be severely restricted.
The Founders started at Male, European, 21, 50 lbs. Sterling/50 acres by state.
Maxine Waters wants “civil war.”
You’re not really addressing their argument. They claim gender differs from sex. And hypocritically, they claim the word “sex” in Title IX (a fifty-year-old law) really meant “gender”.
Here’s a “nonbinary” (as stated by the county coroner) teenager who sat in front of a train last week: https://padailypost.com/2025/03/13/paly-student-killed-by-train-is-identified/
Palo Alto is a lot like Cambridge.
Does anyone know where Estovir went?
He got fired by Elon
OldManFromKS,
I know he is on the mend and was going to PT. He might of had to take a break to allow proper healing.
Turley is still avoiding the Khalil issue. The irony of Turley promoting his book and griping about the anti-free speech movement and no mention of Trump’s own blatant attack on free speech. It’s obvious Turley won’t comment on the case because he doesn’t want to lend credibility to the fact that the Trump administration is attacking free speech in the most obvious way possible.
Khalil has not been charged with a crime and Rubio made a flimsy argument justifying his arrest and attempt to deport him. Turley knows Trump has no case and he refuses to address the biggest anti-free speech case right in front of him. Trump is using the government to threaten schools to remain silent about Israel’s Gaza war and is using the threat of defunding anyone who dares criticize Israel. Even conservative pundits are chiming in and pointing out Trump’s…’errors’ with this case and Turley is peddling his book in an irony of irony while bemoaning the continuing attacks on free speech.
Professor Turley, where’s your outrage? If this happening while Biden was still in office you would be all over it like white on rice. Turley’s free speech advocacy is only speech that Trump and Fox News likes to hear. When the right is violating free speech Turley turns a blind eye of cowardly aversion.
George is still claiming Khalil didn’t repeatedly violate the conditions of his temporary visa. George wants people to believe that Khalil, a vicious anti-Semetic hajji spokesmen for Arab terrorists like Hamas would be a valuable addition to this country.
George, wants people to believe that those being deported must first be charged with a crime. Which is more Democrat BS, parroted from the likes of AOC.
And of course, the war in Gaza is all Israel’s fault. That’s what the Democrats and CNN want George to repeatedly attempt to claim here, that this is an outrage.
Normal Americans realize that George is Cheap Fake American, a fecal stain on American society.
George knows he has no credibility here. But how else would he get sexual satisfaction, other than finding a forum to publicly vent his rage and hatred of his host Professor Turley?
He protesting is not a crime. You have zero evidence showing he violated anything. That’s the problem. When they arrested him ICE first claimed his student visa was revoked. But he wasn’t on a student visa. He was a permanent resident. Then they changed their reason to his green card is being revoked but that requires the government have concrete evidence he commited a crime.
Khalil has no criminal record and the government still has not charged him with anything. They screwed up and in their zeal to arrest him because Trump wanted him arrested they made a mess of things. Now they are trying to figure out how to justify a crime that didn’t occur.
Trump screwed up and Turley knows it. He won’t write about it until an excuse for Trump’s screw up and violating Khalil’s first amendment rights pops up. So far none has and that’s a problem for Turley because sooner or later he will have to criticize Trump’s attack on free speech and that will bring MAGAs wrath onto him like they have been doing to ACB.
Turley has a decision to make. It seems he is not too inclined to crticize Trump and undermine the case to deport Khalil. Trump screwed up and Turley knows it.
Rubbish, all coming from where the Dunning-Kruger effect hits hardest, George-Svelaz.
S. Meyer can’t refute the facts. That’s why he can’t specify exactly what law Khalil violated. He reverts to insults and ad hominem attacks to avoid the reality that Trump’s DHS arrested someone for exercising political speech.
The facts have been presented, but as said before, they aren’t clear yet, and there is a chance the decision can go either way. More facts are needed, but Mr. Dunning-Kruger himself knows the answer in advance. Only a stupid person would respond in his fashion.
George –
Please please keep posting on this website! It is truly the perfect kind of contrast for the insights that Turley brings; your willful and active incompetence combined with a refusal to even attempt to create a valid argument. You simply parrot talking points without grasping the fallacies in those talking points.
Keep up the good work! Continue to be the 20%!
Free speech rights do not include violent physical attacks on people or holding a school’s janitorial staff hostage.
Khalil did not engage in violence. All he did was organize a protest and criticize the government. It’s political speech. None of it is a crime and DHS cannot point out exactly what it is he did that is a crime.
You’re mentioning other people but not Khalil specificallly and that is the problem. They are trying to justify his arrest because other people did things. Not what he did. Turley knows this is a bad idea for Trump and he won’t address it because it would involve criticizing Trump and stating that now he is attacking free speech. Turley can’t do that without alienating MAGAs and his core readership. Republicans.
Incitement George
He’s on a student visa…
Goodbye Khalil
May the fleas of a thousand camels infest his armpits.
Constitution: Adhering to enemies, giving them aid and comfort.
USC: Conspiracy.
He’s not on a student visa. He’s a permanent resident alien. He’s a green card holder.
“Khalil did not engage in violence.”
So you say.
“All he did was organize a protest and criticize the government. It’s political speech. None of it is a crime and DHS cannot point out exactly what it is he did that is a crime.”
A protest that turned violent and broke the law – you had no problems arresting everyone who went to the J6 protest and jailing for decades those who orgaized it – even ones who did not attend.
Regardless, Rather than claim there is no evidence – maybe you should wait for the evidence.
“They are trying to justify his arrest because other people did things. Not what he did.”
Are you talking about Khalil or Trump and myriads of others on J6 ?
If this is about Khalil’s speech – I will defend Khalil and criticise Trump.
But DOJ/State claim it is not, and there is good reason to beleive they are correct
“Regardless, Rather than claim there is no evidence – maybe you should wait for the evidence.”
Nobody else is waiting for it and they are already claiming he committed a crime justifying the arrest. I’m the one saying there’s no justification for the arrest in the first place. He is being targeted for exercising his free speech rights and upon Trump’s demand. Not because he broke the law.
“They are trying to justify his arrest because other people did things. Not what he did.”
Are you talking about Khalil or Trump and myriads of others on J6 ?“
Khalil.
J6 protesters had evidence against them. Including those taking selfies and videos of them commiting crimes. Emails and messages on social media talking about storming and attacking the capitol. All obtained before being arrested. That’s the distinction.
“If this is about Khalil’s speech – I will defend Khalil and criticise Trump.
But DOJ/State claim it is not, and there is good reason to beleive they are correct”
A claim is not evidence. Since when do you trust what the State/DOJ is telling the truth? There is no trust in government, remrmber? Now there is? A competent agency would have had evidence first, not after. There is not even a warrant for the arrest. All they are offering is vague allegations without specifics and clear evidence. That’s not going to fly in court.
You want to believe they have a valid reason without any concrete evidence because it’s much easier to accuse. DHS was under pressure from Trump to arrest Khalil because he was criticizing Israel. He’s punishing the school for allowing an anti-israel protest and not punishing students harshly for exercising their free speech rights and having an opposing view.
“Turley is still avoiding the Khalil issue.”
Becasue DOJ/State are not claiming to seek to deport Khalil over speech.
That may not be true, but it is not now known.
Khalil’s speech is offensive, but everything reported thus far is protected free speech. Prof. Derschowitz covered this on the Derschow.
He stated unequivocally that if DOJ/State do not come up with something beyond protected speech, that he would volunteer to defend Khalil – and for Derschowitz that is about the same as defending Nazi’s (which he also did decades ago). Derschowitz is a strong supporter of Israel.
Regardless there were numerous actual crimes at the events that Khalil participated in and organized.
Connecting Khalil to those is sufficient to deport him.
I would remind those of you on the left that you jailed members of the proud boys and oath keepers for decades – people who were not even at J6 merely for exchanging emails about J6.
I hope DOJ/State will produce more proof that Khalil violated the law – than was produced in the Proud Boys trial.
If they can not – then Khalil can not be deported.
That said the standard of proof in the Khalil case is far lower than a criminal case. The proof necescary to deport him is approximately more likely than not.
Khalil creaed multiple Pro Hamas groups. There are allegations that they either reced money from or paid money too Hamas. Either of those is sufficient if Khalil was aware of it – as he had a decision maker role in those groups and Hamas is designated by the US as a terrorist organization.
At protests that Khalil organized – Jews were beaten up, Property was occupied, buildings were taken over and damaged, there were assaults on police – there is a long list of actual crimes that were committed. As an event organizer Khalil is culpable if any of those were planned or if he participated in any of those.
Regardless the issue is NOT Khalil’s public remarks – atleast not so far. Those all appear to be protected speech.
If the government does not provide evidence of Jhalil’s involvment in actual bad conduct – then he can not be deported.
Though I would note that is SPECIFICALLY because he holds a green card – i.e. he is a permanent resident.
Which he aparently was granted in Dec 2024.
If he was here merely on a Visa – the standards are even lower – and you can be deported for expressing disruptive political views.
I have also heard a claim that there may have been fraud in Khalil’s visa or Green Card application.
That too will get you deported. In fact Fraud in any part of the process of entering the US through to becoming a citizenship is sufficient to have even citizenship revoked.
“Khalil has not been charged with a crime”
He does not need to be. The standard of proof for deportation is Not “beyond a reasonable doubt”
Even if DOJ/STate do not produce more than they have so far – which I doubt will be the case – this will NOT be a huge free speech case.
Most of the J6 cases are significantly larger. While SCOTUS did not specifically cite free speech in the 1512(c) case – because they were able to establish that the application of 1512(c) was overbroad and did not need to address the 1st amendment claims – had 1512(c) applicaion been found valid, the NEXT step would have been a free speech analysis – and all those cases STILL would have failed 1512(c) can not be used to prevent free speech. I would note that no one has arrested Rep Al Green for a 18 USC 1512(c) violation – which he did far more clearly than any J6er.
Regardless – the Khalil case MAY or MAY not be a free speech case. If it is purely about the public remarks we are so far aware of – then it is a free speech case and Khalil will not be deported.
Though I would note that it is an extremely weird case – because Khalil HATES this country and has been very vocal about that – and yet he wishes to live here permanently and become a citizen ? I can easily see denying him citizenship – because of his speech, and the Biden administration could have denied him a green card – because of his speech. There is a difference between revoking something already granted on the basis of speech, and denying something you are applying for on the basis of speech that makes it clear you do not want to be part of this country.
No one is threatening schools over criticism of Israel. But most of these protests have engaged in illegal acts.
Tress passing on schools, preventing classes, destroying property, beating up students. violently clashing with police when ordered to leave. occupying and damaging buildings. go beyond free speech. Further some speech such as “death to jews” – goes beyond protected free speech.
College campuses are not as a whole government created public forumns for the expression of free speech. Disrupting classes is NOT a first amendment right – while disrupting a vote of congress is.
“Even conservative pundits are chiming in and pointing out Trump’s…’errors’ with this case”
I have no idea who you might be talking about. It is impossible to claim “errors” at this time.
DOJ/State have thus far NOT claimed to be deporting Khalil over his speech, but over conduct.
There is Zero doubt that Khalil founded groups, and organized protests that are involved in criminal acts.
What has not been publicly established yet is Khalil’s role in that violence and crime.
I have no idea how anyone claims there are “errors” without knowing DOJ/States full case.
With respect to the Biden admin – Khalil never should have been given a green card.
And he should have been deported by the Biden Admin while on a student Visa.
The standard there is far lower.
John Say,
That was a really great comment.
John Say, you’re missing the point here. Khalil was arrested before they had evidence. How can you be arrested without charges? Was there a warrant? Did a judge sign off on the arrest? None of has been shown.
ICE first claimed he was being arrested because his student visa was revoked, but he wasn’t on a student visa, so they changed it to his green card was revoked but that requires evidence. Rubio’s after-the-fact “finding” is not going to fly in court.
Organizing a protest is not a crime.
Your comparison to the J6 protesters and those who organized it HAD evidence against them directly linking them deliberately planning to storm the capitol. THEN they were arrested. Others literally filmed themselves committing crimes. DHS has no evidence and can’t seem to say exactly what crime he committed. The weak rationalizations and their inability to justify the arrest shows they did not think this through and ended up arresting him at the behest fo Trump instead of doing their job and find evidence first.
Turley is silent because he knows Trump messed up in a major way and he doesn’t want to criticize him for fear of getting a MAGA backlash.
“No one is threatening schools over criticism of Israel. But most of these protests have engaged in illegal acts.”
Trump is. He’s using threats and taking away funds to chill the speech of those protesters. He’s threatening students with visas with deportation if they protest and criticize Israel. That is anti-free speech.
Khalil has no criminal record. He is has not engaged in violence. He’s accused of inciting it, but we both know that won’t fly in court without very specific proof which the DHS does not have. So why was he arrested? That’s the question the judge will have to have an answer to and DHS only has a vague declaration from the secretary of state. The law requires they have concrete proof and they haven’t produced it or don’t have it.
Khalil was going to be deported because Trump wanted him deported regardless if he didn’t commite a crime and that is something even you would be against. He is being targeted because of his political speech.
Trump wanted him gone before the courts could do anything about it and he messed up. Now he’s created a martyr and an example of how much of a dictator he really is.
Statutory law gives the Secretary of State discretion. Khalil was involved in denying students their right to attend class, thereby violating their rights. You fail to make the distinction between “speech” and violating the law and the rights of others.
That still not a crime. There is no right to an education. What law did he violate? You can’t articulate exactly what he did. Neither can Rubio and all he has is an allegation. Allegations are not evidence.
George: Please read my comment to you and John Say @ 9:50, supra. thanks.
“Turley is still avoiding the Khalil issue. “
Turley is not avoiding the issue. The facts are not clear enough to normal people, but to our Dunning-Kruger blogger, everything is clear. In fact, George-Svelaz thinks he is more intelligent than Turley. Don’t everyone laugh at the same time.
The elitism and hypocrisy at Harvard goes back a ling way (in 1978 a book was written about it called “Harvard Hates America”). This is the same disease but in the new, trendy form of promoting a particular kind of delusion that has now become faddish.
“McCarthy.” What a fitting name.
#9. Meh, actually it’s a disgrace to the name. Senator McCarthy’s only fault was he failed to understand the American public, fast becoming infatuated with the new tv technology replacing the radio, had already begun to base their judgements of right and wrong not upon the logic of what was spoken, but rather upon how well dressed one looked and how nice they sounded. Logical thinking went out the window and visual perception of the books cover ruled over it’s content.
The Harvard Motto of 1692 was “Veritas Christo et Ecclesiae.” It was later changed only to “Veritas.” The 1642 Mission Statement was, “Let every Student be plainly instructed, and earnestly pressed to consider well, the main end of his life and studies is, to know God and Jesus Christ which is eternal life (John 17:3) and therefore to lay Christ in the bottom, as the only foundation of all sound knowledge and learning. And seeing the Lord only gives wisdom, let every one seriously set himself by prayer in secret to seek it of him (Prov. 2:3).”
The current Mission statement (from Harvard’s website is:
“The mission of Harvard College is to educate the citizens and citizen-leaders for our society. We do this through our commitment to the transformative power of a liberal arts and sciences education.
Beginning in the classroom with exposure to new ideas, new ways of understanding, and new ways of knowing, students embark on a journey of intellectual transformation. Through a diverse living environment, where students live with people who are studying different topics, who come from different walks of life and have evolving identities, intellectual transformation is deepened and conditions for social transformation are created. From this we hope that students will begin to fashion their lives by gaining a sense of what they want to do with their gifts and talents, assessing their values and interests, and learning how they can best serve the world.”
The fundamentals of running an organization is to have a Mission and Vision. From the Mission and Vision Statements, all decisions and policies are made. It appears that some of the faculty have lost sight of their mission and do not equally receive topics from different ways of life or “new” ideas, ways of understanding….unless it is their way. How dare anyone, a mere mortal step into these hallowed halls and challenge we the anointed!”
I observe a group of elite who ascribe to an irrational distain for anything that would challenge their cozy ivory tower and narrow point of view.
Veritas, I hope in time Veritas will prevail.
Personally, I ascribe to the original motto and mission statement.
There was a time when someone saying they went to Harvard meant something. Now, not so much. If I owned a business, I would pass over a Harvard grad for someone who went to a state school. Or, better yet, give a high school grad with a high GPA, willingness to learn and work a paid internship.
@Upstate
Same here, Harvard-educated candidates would go straight into the circular file. And depending on the necessary skill set, I too, might prefer someone that hadn’t encountered the useless morass of modern higher ed at all.
neuter him.