Columbia Faculty's Academic Freedom Frenzy
Columbia Faculty's Academic Freedom Frenzy
Columbia’s professors are shadow-boxing champions against nonexistent silencers of academic free speech.
Since October 7, many Columbia faculty members from all sides of the political spectrum have expressed concern that the administration is suppressing academic free speech, the ability to express opinions related to their academic work without fear of retribution.
In December, the Columbia chapter of the American Association of University Professors released a statement that claimed they have “witnessed a narrowing of the space of free and open inquiry” and criticized “the failure of Columbia administrators to uphold the basic principles of academic freedom.” A group of pro-Palestine professors on January 22 wrote in Spectator that they believed Columbia was undermining “the core values of academic freedom” and was not doing enough to condemn Islamophobia.
From the pro-Israel side, Assistant Professor of Business Shai Davidai claimed that Palestinian supporters are running a “silencing campaign” against him, an action which he believes the University endorses by allowing antisemitism to go unpunished. Other pro-Israel faculty echoed this sentiment in a recent letter in Spectator in which they claimed that “core values” of university members’ “collective rights to learn, work, and live together” had been violated.
These declarations of crisis are just a mirage. The reality is that these academics are boxing against shadows—the narrative that Columbia is working to suppress academic free speech is simply a myth. The record demonstrates that the Columbia administration rarely disciplines faculty, even in edge cases. The school has sustained an environment of near-universal academic free speech for faculty, even after October 7. Here’s what that looks like:
On February 2nd, Davidai wrote on X that pro-Palestinian students protesting at the “All Out for Palestine and Columbia University” rally want “Dead Israeli Jews.” He went on to accuse University President Minouche Shafik of “appeasing Hamas supporters” and claimed she “doesn’t really care about Jewish and Israeli lives.” He doubled down on February 23rd, writing on X that Students for Justice in Palestine and Jewish Voice for Peace are “terrorist-sympathizing” organizations that want “violence in New York City” and “violence at Columbia.”
These are just some of the many claims Davidai has made that negatively stereotype Columbia community members by mischaracterizing their beliefs. This kind of speech can create a hostile learning environment and is inappropriate for any faculty member to make against members of their academic community.
Despite making these statements, Davidai has received no real consequences from the University for his speech. On March 8th, Davidai claimed he was under investigation by the University for his actions. Investigations are routine procedures for complaints received by Columbia’s Equal Opportunity and Affirmative Action Office and do not constitute disciplinary action. Unless the investigation is completed and Davidai is reprimanded, Davidai cannot claim he receives anything less than full academic freedom.
Similarly, the University has not taken any action against Columbia Law Professor Katherine Franke. On January 25, Franke gave an interview about the chemical attack against pro-Palestine protestors on January 19. She criticized Columbia’s admission of students who served in the IDF, which is required of most Israeli Jews, pointing to instances when Israeli students harassed Palestinian students without consequence. Franke’s comments were perceived as problematic because she tied these instances to Israeli students’ mandatory military service requirements and suggested the University has “not taken [their aggression] seriously.”
The University’s only response to Franke, who is tenured, was a statement given to the Israeli newspaper Haaretz, which stated that the University was “proud of our students and military veterans from Israel and around the world.” Like Davidai, the University has taken no real disciplinary action against Franke.
Columbia’s hesitancy to discipline faculty for controversial statements is not new. In the Columbia Unbecoming controversy of 2005, a documentary accusing some Columbia faculty of antisemitic behavior attracted national attention. Allegations that then-Associate Professor Joseph Massad, untenured at the time, discriminated against pro-Israel and Jewish students attracted widespread publicity. One incident featured in the Columbia Unbecoming documentary was when Massad belligerently asked a former IDF soldier, “How many Palestinians have you killed?” multiple times at an off-campus lecture. While the administration’s ad hoc committee found the students’ claims against Massad to be credible, the University took no disciplinary action against Massad, and he received tenure in 2009. Now, Massad has received public ire for his Electronic Intifada article written in response to October 7, in which he labeled the attack as “awesome.” This article led to tens of thousands signing an online petition demanding the University fire Massad. Yet, the University has taken no action against Massad.
In another controversy, adjunct professor Dinah PoKempner repeatedly said the “n-word” while laughing during a class in 2021. She was not disciplined or reprimanded. Instead, the University let her finish her adjunct contract and chose not to rehire her.
One incident in which the University did take action against a faculty member for their speech was the case of Jeffrey Lieberman in 2022. Lieberman, then the chair of the Psychiatry Department and Lawrence C. Kolb Professor of Psychiatry posted a racist tweet where he called a black model a “freak of nature.” Following public outcry, the University publicly suspended Lieberman. However, this punishment was only a mirage—Lieberman’s suspension was quietly lifted at some point in the past two years, and he retains his position as Lawrence C. Kolb Professor of Psychiatry. The only lasting consequence Liberman seems to have faced was losing his department chair position.
Protection for academic free speech seems universal. These professors were both tenured (Franke, Lieberman, and Massad post-2009) and non-tenured (Massad pre-2009 and Davidai). Their posts spanned the Business School, Medical Center, Law School, and the undergraduate schools. Their speech ranged from student harassment to overt racism.
Columbia holds no prisoners. I had difficulty finding any instance of the University seriously disciplining a professor for an infraction other than plagiarism or having inappropriate relations with a Columbia community member.1 I challenge anyone doubting the wealth of academic freedom at Columbia to find an example of the administration taking consequential disciplinary action against a faculty member for a reason other than those two.
The existence of universal academic free speech at Columbia also raises concerns about the state of tenure. Academics often claim the primary purpose of awarding tenure is to “safeguard academic freedom.” However, Massad was untenured during the release of Columbia Unbecoming, and Davidai is presently untenured—both faced inconsequential repercussions. This begs the question: What exactly is being safeguarded by tenure? If academic freedom is already protected at Columbia regardless of tenure status, the purpose of tenure should be reevaluated.
Columbia faculty’s claims of an academic free speech crisis lack a factual basis. By continuing to promote a false narrative, they are undermining the student-faculty and faculty-administration relationships that create a healthy academic environment. Even though they’re boxing shadows, they hurt everyone else in the crossfire.
Mr. Armstrong is a freshman at Columbia College studying physics and a staff writer for Sundial.
The dismissal mentioned is that of former Professor Thomas Jessel. The administration did not publicly confirm the cause of his dismissal, but the general consensus was that it was in response to an inappropriate relationship with a Columbia community member.