New York Times Op-Ed: She Is Outrageous, Demeaning, Dangerous. She Shouldn’t Be Punished., by John McWhorter (Columbia; Google Scholar):
For years now, Amy Wax, a University of Pennsylvania law professor, has attracted attention for her statements about race and gender. …
For me, watching Wax go farther and farther down this path has become almost a spectator sport, though a glum one.
In response to complaints from students and faculty members, in 2018 the University of Pennsylvania said she would no longer teach required first-year classes. Last week it increased the penalty, suspending her for a year, removing her from her endowed position and ending her summer pay permanently.
Wax’s contributions to public discourse have been stunningly numb to compassion, courtesy and sometimes even to coherence, often recalling those of a certain former president. But though her statements (some of which she has attempted to distance herself from) are egregious and then some, so is her punishment. …
The reality is that today, elite universities like the University of Pennsylvania are among the least racist places on the planet. But what are Black students to think, for example, when on top of everything else, Wax brings in the avowed white supremacist Jared Taylor to a seminar? …
[U]pholding the ideals of free speech means living with the discomfort — or even anger and injury — that offensive ideas can cause. Of late, universities have experienced this kind of discomfort firsthand amid ongoing protests against the legitimacy and actions of Israel. Identifying the line between legitimate protest and threats or harassment has been difficult. Student clubs have been suspended, demonstrations have been pushed off campus and at least one professor has been fired for sharing anti-Israel sentiments. But no university has categorically prohibited criticism of Israel. That’s because, as uncomfortable as the debate about Israel can be, and as close to home as it hits for many students, letting them encounter ideas that differ from their own is an important part of their education that prepares them to take their place in a democracy.
The idea that racism is so uniquely toxic that it should be an exception to the ideal of free speech is not self-evident. It is specific to this moment, and will probably seem unwise and arbitrary to future chroniclers. Especially for universities, if exposing people to potential discomfort is permissible when it comes to geopolitics, then it must also be permissible when it comes to race.
Amy Wax loudly espouses views that most reasonable people find repellent. This does not justify punishing her for expressing them. Her suspension, with the other penalties, is a kind of ritual act, an unconvincing performance of moral purity. She should be exonerated.
The New Criterion: Waxing about Amy, by Joshua T. Katz (Princeton):
Earlier this week, Amy Wax, the Robert Mundheim Professor of Law at the University of Pennsylvania, was publicly reprimanded by her employer of twenty-three years, which announced in its literary equivalent of the stocks, the Franklinian Almanac, that she will be severely sanctioned for “flagrant unprofessional conduct.” Readers of The New Criterion are surely aware of the onslaught of vitriol that so many other publications—and readers and non-readers of these other publications—have for some years been directing at Professor Wax, whose career has been on the face of things a showstopper: B.S. in molecular biophysics and biochemistry (Yale), M.Phil. in psychology, philosophy, and physiology (Oxford), M.D. with a specialty in neuroscience (Harvard), and J.D. (Columbia); fifteen cases tried before the Supreme Court; and professorships at the University of Virginia and Penn, the latter of which bestowed on her its most prestigious award for pedagogical excellence. But because she is an Ivy League professor who does not hesitate to speak her conservative mind about a number of controversial issues, especially concerning race, ethnicity, gender, and sexual orientation, she is a highly visible target in our current polarized environment.
There is no doubt that Professor Wax says things that make me squirm. But a lot of people say things that make me squirm: Joe Biden, Kamala Harris, Tim Walz, Donald Trump, and J. D. Vance, to name five. (Yes, some are more squirm-inducing than others.) Law professors, too, from across the political and intellectual spectrum: Adrian Vermeule, Michael McConnell, Erwin Chemerinsky, Heather Gerken, and Kimberlé Crenshaw. Heck, I sometimes say things that make me squirm. A bit of squirming is good for the soul: it’s important to have one’s views challenged and to invite others to challenge them, whether the result of the subsequent sparring is the hardening of one’s position or the recognition that there is in fact something to that other point of view.
The best reporting on what has been happening to Professor Wax comes from Aaron Sibarium at The Washington Free Beacon, who wrote about her case in February 2023, February 2024, and again in recent days. There is no reason to reiterate the major points in Sibarium’s outstanding articles, but aside from simply feeling the need to amplify the injustice, I have four reasons for writing to defend and praise Professor Wax, as well as to excoriate those who are working to take her down.
The first reason is personal. Professor Wax—Amy—is my friend, and one should not abandon one’s friends. …
Second, there is that pesky matter known as academic freedom, a subject dear to my heart. …
Third, it has been widely reported (see, e.g., this account by Graham Piro of FIRE) that Penn engaged in procedural irregularities in order to “get” Professor Wax. If true—and I have every reason to believe that it is true—this should upset every principled member of society. After all, you could be next. …
Fourth and finally, the language that Penn uses to describe Professor Wax’s misdemeanors in the letter of reprimand is both largely unconvincing and a truly staggering example of hypocrisy. …
No matter how you look at things, the issues involved in Amy Wax’s case are not pretty. But a lot of things in America right now are not pretty, including college campuses generally and the University of Pennsylvania’s in particular. How despicable it is that Penn allows many of its members to spew hate without consequence while imposing on just one very distinguished professor the sanction of noting “in public appearances that you speak for yourself alone and not as a University or Penn Carey Law School faculty member.”
The Spectator, Is the Enlightenment Over?:
