I just returned from the University of Wyoming, where I debated the President of the American Association of University Professors (AAUP) Todd Wolfson over the need for colleges and universities to maintain institutional neutrality. The debate was organized by the Steamboat Institute and was live-streamed. Given the interest in the debate and the polling results below, I am hopeful that we can prevail in this existential battle for higher education. Steamboat has now posted the debate in case you would like to hear the arguments on both sides of this issue.
The formal question presented for debate was: “Is institutional neutrality necessary to preserve the university as a forum for open inquiry rather than an actor in political disputes?”
I spoke in favor of institutional neutrality while Wolfson argued against it as a necessary component to higher education.
Wolfson was elected as AAUP president on a pledge to make that organization a “fighting organization” against what he views as the rise of fascism, and the organization has been criticized for its political advocacy, including a recent controversy over the targeting of Civics Centers. During our exchange, Dr. Wolfson admitted that the AAUP has changed from being itself an ideologically neutral organization but said that they have now become a union that has dispensed with neutrality.
I enjoyed meeting Dr. Wolfson, who presented a spirited argument against institutional neutrality. I found him entirely civil, respectful, and frank in addressing these issues. I am also thankful to George Bogden, who moderated the debate in Laramie.
The viewers from around the country were polled after the debate and voted in favor of institutional neutrality 64% to 14% (with 23% undecided).
Here is the debate:
I debated the President of the American Association of University Professors (AAUP) Todd Wolfson….
The AAUP claims to have 44,000 members. The total number of full and part time faculty at public and private universities is ~ 1.5 million. Thus, AAUP members comprise [(44,000 / 1,500,000)*100] = 0.029 or 2.9% of faculty across America. You are literally beating a dead horse. Here in Virginia, the number of active AAUP chapters is incredibly small. Univ of Virginia has a chapter in name only.
You would do better by debating publishers of academic peer review journals. You are likely one of the best qualified intellectuals in legal circles to take on the peer review journal industry. The industry lacks intellectual integrity and does sloppy work. For example, a recent retraction by a “prestigious” medical journal is getting a lot of traction
Huang, Z., Zeng, L., Ruan, Z. et al. RETRACTED ARTICLE: Time-of-day immunochemotherapy in non-small cell lung cancer: a randomized phase 3 trial. Nat Med 32, 1233–1240 (2026). doi.org/10.1038/s41591-025-04181-w
Published 02 February 2026
The problem with this retraction by the “famed” Nature Medicine journal, is that it was retracted yesterday, June 24. It has already been
cited 22 times. Two publications that have cited this retracted article include other “prestigious” peer review journals like JEM Journal of Experimental Medicine and JAMA: Journal of the American Medical Association. This is truly egregious.
Maria Nogales-Pons, Mariola Munárriz-Paños, Teresa Aceña-Gonzalo, María Casanova-Acebes; Myeloid diversity in tumors: Shaped by genes, location, and time. J Exp Med 6 April 2026; 223 (4): e20252267. doi.org/10.1084/jem.20252267
Inoue S, Tsuboi I, Miszczyk M, et al. Time-of-Day Immunotherapy Administration and Outcomes in Advanced Cancers: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. JAMA Netw Open. 2026;9(5):e2610815. doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2026.10815
Worse is that the retracted article should have never been published b/c red flags are apparent upon reading it. And yet, the editors and reviewers of Nature Medicine caught none of these red flag or ignored them on purpose, and published the fraudulent paper. Chinese authors, of course – China is #1 in publishing fraudulent medical science papers.
For those academics who depend on peer review journals for our own research purposes, we have developed a righteous contempt towards these massive medical journal organizations like Nature and JAMA. I don’t know about legal peer review journals, but medical peer review journals are not what they used to be. Someone needs to call them out on their lucrative and fraudulent business, not to mention their contemptuous attitudes towards Americans.
Follow the science™ is now a joke.
You could help, Professor Turley, by challenging these fraudsters.
Turley’s job is protecting the interests of the Federalist Society. He’s not going to do anything about some other endeavors.
“The viewers from around the country were polled after the debate and voted in favor of institutional neutrality 64% to 14% (with 23% undecided).”
What percentage was the breakdown of viewers considering themselves to be conservatives?
Trump manages to get close to 100% approval for those who are in the audience at his rallies, for example.
All these lefty antics since 2011 occupy wall street are the exact same losing arguments.
Modern woke universities are not modern. They are as old as the ages. When I was taking business related courses at the University of Virginia I was amazed by the balcony structure around the perimeter of the commons. The balcony was used so that professors could transit the buildings without having to be exposed to unruly, highly emotional and often verbally combative students. How ironic that modern universities feature virtual balconies to separate the indoctrinators from the yet to be indoctrinated. I began my university experience in the late sixties. The Vietnam war was raging. The colleges were festering stews of various causes. Intellectual maturity was virtually nonexistent. Life experience was not considered necessary before postulating on even the most serious topics. Out of this dubious intellectual morass came the university leadership of today. The disturbed inmates from then are now running the asylums of today. The harsh reality, and the saddest part of it all, is that it’s not going to get better. The intellectual damage has been passed down to new generations of woke torchbearers, who will do the same to the next, and the next and the next. Expect the worst. Hope for the best. Live and prepare for the predetermined reality of the future.
Speaking of old, how long ago was it that gladiatorial games were performed for the amusement of the Leader?
Trump reached back to the excesses of the Roman empire to put his face on currency, his name and likeness on government buildings, giant arches to commemorate himself, and, of course, sweaty men fighting in the ring.
Dear Prof Turley,
I lean toward political ‘noo-trale-ity’. I dislike both Republican and Democrat big wigs with equal enthusiasm.
Not sure institutions, especially educational institutions, can be ‘neutral’. By definition, knowledge is the absence of ignorance. It is not neutral. .. it requires objective, fair, rational and authoritative arguments.
As President Trump recently pointed out @ UFC 250, ‘everybody is neutral until you punch them in the nose’.
*Tucker Carlson has certainly turned over a new leaf.. . fancies himself the ‘Switzerland’ of our political age of rage!
DG
Tucker is playing both sides of the street. Wake up.
Why I left Tucker Carlson as a mentor–See his argument above.
A good example of why institutional neutrality is necessary, Public universities punish criticism of gender ideology as harassment, discrimination: lawsuits
https://justthenews.com/nation/free-speech/public-universities-punish-criticism-gender-ideology-harassment-discrimination
Wolfson is merely doing his part to implement the “Long March Through the Institutions”. It is the Leftist philosophy of achieving radical social change by infiltrating and transforming key societal structures from within rather than through violent revolution, which might come anyways since so many people are aware of what they are doing. “Institutional neutrality” is something Wolfson wouldn’t contemplate or give voice to even if he wanted to, because doing so would mean he’d immediately lose his AAUP presidency and the doors to almost all of modern academia would permanently slam shut on him.
Radical Political Views: Refers to individuals or ideologies that advocate for rapid, sweeping, and fundamental changes to societal, economic, or political structures.
It is difficult to be radical and gradual at the same time.
Wrong. What makes something radical is the intended result, not the pace at which you get there. The terminology in my comment comes from the German communist student activist Dutschke, who came up with the concept of the ““Long March Through the Institutions” and began promoting it starting back about 1967. His use of ‘long march’ was in tribute to Mao’s Long March in the mid-1930s that saved his revolutionary army and ultimately led to his victory and achievement of power in the 1940s. It took him a long time on that road to power, and Maoism and its application in China was definitely radical under any definition no matter how long it took to get there.
Wolfson might have been civil during the debate, but his organization is primarily comprised of uncivil totalitarian thugs. His polite demeanor was as real as the ‘warm smile” of Ayatollah Khamenei (as described by the Washington Post in their obituary). He is a classic self-loathing progressive Jew who was silent when the pro-Hamas thugs terrorized Jewish students on American campuses. Like those of his ilk who “feed the crocodiles” rather than standing against them, may he some become one of their meals!
Are these totalitarian thugs in the room with you now? Do they haunt your dreams?
I saw no pro-Hamas thugs on campuses, though I did see some people concerned the IDF was using babies as precision targets for long range target practice and using multiple guided missiles to kill American aid workers in marked World Kitchen vehicles, traveling on a pre-approved route.
You are either a bald face liar or an ignoramus. As just one example, Jewish students at UCLA were physically blocked from attending classes. This is well documented. I wish someone would send you a one-way ticket to Gaza or Teheran
This just seems like a topic that is literally not debatable. The need for neutrality seems obvious.
Professor Turley writes, “I enjoyed meeting Dr. Wolfson, who presented a spirited argument against institutional neutrality.” Wolfson won’t be nearly so charming if Democrats ever get the power they want.
Congratulations on winning 64% to 14%, professor. Just remember, some would hurt you if they can. Winners are not appreciated by everyone. Please, be careful, for all our sakes.
WTF are you blabbling about?
I’ll bet you a buck that Diogenes is thoroughly convinced someone waded into the Lincoln reflecting pool with a box cutter and somehow made a 300 foot long slit in the new lining underwater without being detected JUST to sabotage dear leaders most perfect beautification project. 🙂
Let’s not piggy pile on Diogenes. Poor fellow has probably lost a LOT of money on his big purchase of the Melania memecoin. That’s gotta hurt.
“They went down with probably a box cutter or a very sharp razor of some kind or a knife, and they cut, and then they started ripping it up. You know why? Because they’re sick people,” Trump said in the Oval Office on Wednesday.
President Trump is not wrong.
Obama spent 35 million trying to repair it. What say ye, anon.
Obama spent $35 million actually repairing it by putting in supporting foundation to raise it back to the original level from where it had sunk into the muck that Washington D.C. is built on. Actual civil engineering work and not the landlord’s special slap on some paint and cover the problems.
“Obama spent $35 million actually repairing it . . .”
Which was closed within weeks because of a — wait for it: algae bloom.
Another graduate from Trump University has entered the chat.
Obama’s ineffective 34 million boondoggle repair of the reflecting pool was the horror this nation had to endure under that half-black final-democrat president and he didn’t even have to deal with radicals like Trump’s cost saving brilliant reconstruction of our nation’s reflecting pool. Thank god there will never be another democrat president.
I’m very ordinary. I can appreciate the uncommon links and thoughts of others. I’ll refrain from comments. I have noticed knowledge is selfishly guarded.
I haven’t seen anything like this since I put Frontline on my cat and watched the fleas go insane.
Do you eat cats too?
Some folks do… you ???
Diogenes,
HA! Good one!
The good professor has mentioned in the past about getting “hate” {e}mail. I would not put it past some of our leftist friends to do something like what you are suggesting.
So, going into the debate 66% believed in your position, and at the end of the debate 64% believed in your position. I’m guessing this was within the margin of error. So essentially, nobody’s opinions were changed.
64% to your 14%. Read the room, Sasquatch. To quote an infamous President, “We won.”
Thanks for your response Diogenes. I was trying to make the very point that individuals coming into the debate already largely agreed with the Professor but those that didn’t were ‘dug in’ on the topic and couldn’t be swayed. But thanks for demonstrating your maturity to the entire community through your ad hominem attack.
If you’re not a troll, you have my apologies.
No need to apologize for your stupidity. Just know its permanent.
Diogenes,
I would argue that 64% know institutional neutrality is necessary to preserve the university as a forum for open inquiry rather than an actor in political disputes. It is just common sense.
True, and the 14% don’t want open inquiry; they want the narrative. Period.
Also, I think this may be a troll, Upstate. He throws out an equivocal statement and then accuses me of friendly fire maybe just to mess with my head. He or somebody else is posting multiple messages as though he were multiple individuals, all in agreement. It’s becoming a jungle on this blog. It’s hard to tell who is who.
Diogenes,
I just assume they are the same person.
George of the Jungle, no doubt 😉
-2%
“. . . going into the debate 66% believed in your position . . .”
Where did you get that from? (Voices in your head don’t count as evidence.)
Wolfson was good when he applied boilerplate arguments. He failed when asked to think along other lines, and tried frequently tried to delimit the arguments that should be allowed. Your arguments/statements were more timely and challenging to him. The moderator was often on the mark in his questions. You devastated him on AAUP use of political positions. Wolfson sometimes confuses the difference between faculty and university positions.
Thank you SO much, Professor Turley, for participating in this important debate and posting it for your readers to enjoy. I truly believe that the failure of our universities to facilitate a robust dialogue among faculty and students is a root cause of the political movement that is gaining traction here in New York State and elsewhere. The primary results in certain Congressional districts here this week are frightening.
Glad it wasn’t just managing an oppositional temper tantrum. Congrats, Professor, and thank you.
The biggest Fascists today are the leftwing Fascists who suppress dissent, cancel opposing voices, ban books and speakers with whom they disagree, and are institutionally intolerant of opinions they dislike. It’s shameful, really. Ironically, Fascists like Wolfson will impose the most extreme form of intolerant Fascism while claiming to fight Fascism.
“The viewers from around the country were polled after the debate and voted in favor of institutional neutrality 64% to 14% (with 23% undecided).”
Not really surprising.
Too bad most colleges will simply ignore the results.
Ignore? Since when are private and/or public collages bound by polls? Especially by a wholly ignorant public. Get some brains.
Steamboat is a hard-right-wing conservative organization. Why would those on the left care what they presented?
Jonathan. . . . .”Nuetrality”. . .misspelled and should be Neutrality.
https://i0.wp.com/educationdojo.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/moist-people-not-offended-occassional-typo.jpg?
Moist people aren’t offended by the occasional typo!
Most people are all wet on most subjects.
A TYPO! OMG A TYPO!!! run! a typo, grab your children!
Dun’t dja jus luvs dem gremmer poliz? Deys keyps da res of used frim looken ignerent by der learnen’ allin youse thingz.
The liberals worry about fascism but are the real fascists.
fascism /făsh′ĭz″əm/
noun
A system of government marked by centralization of authority under a dictator, a capitalist economy subject to stringent governmental controls, violent suppression of the opposition, and typically a policy of belligerent nationalism and racism. – The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, 5th Edition
1. A system of government marked by centralization of authority under a dictator:
Where do we find one party systems which are in reality dictatorships? Blue states like California.
2. A capitalist economy subject to stringent governmental controls:
Democrats regulation every aspect of industry and our lives, Big brother and the nanny state.
3. Violent suppression of the opposition:
Arresting and trying the opposition on fake charges like quid pro quo, Russian collusion, fake rape, fake fraud and fake campaign violations. Antifa and BLM are the Nazi Brown-shirts of today’s Democrats using violence all other the United States.
4. Typically a policy of belligerent nationalism and racism:
The Democrat’s news nationalism is LGBTQ and they are very belligerent. Rampant racism and hatred of the Jewish People.
Democrats and the LEFT are Fascists…fight a CIVIL WAR… in the USA it is their 2nd Civil War
The Democrat party needs to be Abolished! We need to decentralize Power…which is too easy to BUY
The Plan to do that
– Cut 50% of Fed gov spending
– Move 75% of DC to Heartland
– End fed aid cities, states, college, unions & non-profits
– Cut SNAP 75%
– 1% tax Gross wall street trans & money goes offshore
– 20% duty on ALL imports
– Tax all non-profits anyone gets $100k: colleges, hospitals, etc
– Remove tax credits renewables, affordable housing, etc
– Jail Trump persecutors & Dems protectors, illegal helpers, etc
– Outlaw public union, they are a political army for democrats
– Ban union/company $ politics, only voters can fund politics
– voting 1 day, in person, with ID, I don’t care if you vote, I care if you cheat
– 12 year limit on federal office….judge, president, senate, congress
– Roundup all illegals to raise wages and give Americans Jobs
– END all bonuses financial world till every dime of FED money is paid off
So a 2nd civil war huh? You belong in a soft cell.
The democrats JUST got replaced with the marxists so no more democrat party but they are gonna reuse the name and branding.
Don’t be confused with the old democrat party that no longer exists.
I wonder who the old school democrats will be voting for now that there party is gone.
Better Idea
DEFUND Colleges and Non-profits
STOP giving them federal money…including student loans
Let capitalism figure out which colleges are worth saving! Most aren’t!
Also Outlaw Public unions the political army of the democrats, funded by taxpayers!
Also end union and company funding of politics.
If you aren’t able to VOTE…you can’t FUND politics!
Great idea! That means all the medications you take, all the medical procedures you and your family have benefitted from, most of the technology you utilize in day-to-day life would not exist as most discoveries of this nature come from Universities working on federal grants. So yes – by all means, let’s revert to a third world nation because you don’t like the fact that the more educated people become, the more they realize that the GOP is a backward looking party.
Sorry you could not be more wrong. That used to be true but now those advances come almost exclusively from private industry which is sad because Universities used to be good for us, now they are woke cesspools. Note: do not go there, you will be a turd. Liberals have contributed nothing to the advancement of humanity.
Private industry mainly concentrates on keeping their patents fresh and preventing competition.
Fundamental research is in universities because grad students are cheaper than hiring talent directly.
Better idea…. you get a brain that works as intended.
Wow – what a devastating retort.