Search Results

This book concludes with a discussion of academic freedom after Keyishian v. Board of Regents. It begins by assessing the link between academic freedom and the American left as well as the factors that contributed to the demise of the leftist movement, most notably the waves of political repression that swept the country. It then considers how the Supreme Court enshrined academic freedom as a special concern of the First Amendment and goes on to examine the lasting impact of anti-subversive purges on education, academic freedom, and a viable tradition of progressive social change. It also explores three notable characteristics of the assault on academic freedom in the 1950s: guilt by association, the response of universities, and the part played by liberals. Finally, it emphasizes the role of courts, led by the Supreme Court, in the continuing saga of free speech and democracy in America. It argues that teachers, students, universities, judges, and the whole body politic should adhere to the promise of Keyishian v. Board of Regents in the post-9/11 era.

This book concludes with a discussion of academic freedom after Keyishian v. Board of Regents. It begins by assessing the link between academic freedom and the American left as well as the factors that contributed to the demise of the leftist movement, most notably the waves of political repression that swept the country. It then considers how the Supreme Court enshrined academic freedom as a special concern of the First Amendment and goes on to examine the lasting impact of anti-subversive purges on education, academic freedom, and a viable tradition of progressive social change. It also explores three notable characteristics of the assault on academic freedom in the 1950s: guilt by association, the response of universities, and the part played by liberals. Finally, it emphasizes the role of courts, led by the Supreme Court, in the continuing saga of free speech and democracy in America. It argues that teachers, students, universities, judges, and the whole body politic should adhere to the promise of Keyishian v. Board of Regents in the post-9/11 era.

This chapter examines some of the questions faced by contemporary universities about the future and meaning of academic freedom, as a matter of both policy and First Amendment right, in the wake of Keyishian v. Board of Regents. The Supreme Court's 1967 decision in Keyishian was a major blow to statewide loyalty programs. In the three years after the ruling, courts in Texas, Kansas, New Hampshire, Illinois, Nebraska, California, Mississippi, Florida, and the District Columbia invalidated public-employee loyalty laws. The Supreme Court expanded on the promise of Keyishian, in part by extending academic freedom to college students. However, Keyishian left many questions about the scope of academic freedom unanswered. It sparked conflicts in local communities, at school board meetings, and among university trustees over where to draw the line. This chapter discusses issues of race, sex, and judicial retrenchment as they relate to academic freedom, along with academic freedom as an institutional right and the persistence of loyalty oaths all over America.

This chapter examines some of the questions faced by contemporary universities about the future and meaning of academic freedom, as a matter of both policy and First Amendment right, in the wake of Keyishian v. Board of Regents. The Supreme Court's 1967 decision in Keyishian was a major blow to statewide loyalty programs. In the three years after the ruling, courts in Texas, Kansas, New Hampshire, Illinois, Nebraska, California, Mississippi, Florida, and the District Columbia invalidated public-employee loyalty laws. The Supreme Court expanded on the promise of Keyishian, in part by extending academic freedom to college students. However, Keyishian left many questions about the scope of academic freedom unanswered. It sparked conflicts in local communities, at school board meetings, and among university trustees over where to draw the line. This chapter discusses issues of race, sex, and judicial retrenchment as they relate to academic freedom, along with academic freedom as an institutional right and the persistence of loyalty oaths all over America.

This chapter explores academic freedom-related issues that have arisen since September 11, 2001, both in the schools and in the courts. The issues include new controversies regarding loyalty oaths, pressures against outspoken professors and against Middle East studies, and broad uses of the word terrorism to silence dissent. This chapter considers the debate over censorship after 9/11 and whether the government's anti-terrorism measures are similar to the anti-communist purges it practicted in the past. In particular, it discusses one anti-terrorism law that relates to academic freedom: the 1996 Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act. It also examines the Supreme Court decision in the Humanitarian Law Project case, the controversy surrounding Middle East studies, and a number of court cases relevant to the question of academic freedom.

This chapter explores academic freedom-related issues that have arisen since September 11, 2001, both in the schools and in the courts. The issues include new controversies regarding loyalty oaths, pressures against outspoken professors and against Middle East studies, and broad uses of the word terrorism to silence dissent. This chapter considers the debate over censorship after 9/11 and whether the government's anti-terrorism measures are similar to the anti-communist purges it practicted in the past. In particular, it discusses one anti-terrorism law that relates to academic freedom: the 1996 Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act. It also examines the Supreme Court decision in the Humanitarian Law Project case, the controversy surrounding Middle East studies, and a number of court cases relevant to the question of academic freedom.

This book examines the political, cultural, and legal events that gave rise to academic freedom as a special concern of the First Amendment. Focusing on the inquisitions of New York professors and teachers during the twentieth century, it discusses the loyalty purges at schools and universities during the worst years of the Red Scare and the landmark Supreme Court decisions in two cases that revolved around the Feinberg Law: Adler v. Board of Education and Keyishian v. Board of Regents. It argues that we must defend the First Amendment principle of academic freedom as a limit on what administrators of public institutions and other government officials can do to their teachers and students.

This book examines the political, cultural, and legal events that gave rise to academic freedom as a special concern of the First Amendment. Focusing on the inquisitions of New York professors and teachers during the twentieth century, it discusses the loyalty purges at schools and universities during the worst years of the Red Scare and the landmark Supreme Court decisions in two cases that revolved around the Feinberg Law: Adler v. Board of Education and Keyishian v. Board of Regents. It argues that we must defend the First Amendment principle of academic freedom as a limit on what administrators of public institutions and other government officials can do to their teachers and students.

This chapter examines the origins of academic freedom as an American ideal. It considers how conflicts over the role of professors, the powers of trustees, and the very nature of the academic enterprise paved the way for the notion of college teaching as a profession and of the university as a venue for scholarly research and critical inquiry. In particular, it discusses the controversies surrounding the dismissal of Edward Ross, a professor from Stanford University, and Scott Nearing, an economics professor at the University of Pennsylvania's Wharton School of Finance and Commerce, as well as the involvement of the American Association of University Professors in Nearing's case. It also analyzes the first Red Scare that was used to generate public panic about an impending revolution, the role of the New York legislature in promoting fears about the dangers of communism, and the consequences for academic freedom.

This chapter examines the origins of academic freedom as an American ideal. It considers how conflicts over the role of professors, the powers of trustees, and the very nature of the academic enterprise paved the way for the notion of college teaching as a profession and of the university as a venue for scholarly research and critical inquiry. In particular, it discusses the controversies surrounding the dismissal of Edward Ross, a professor from Stanford University, and Scott Nearing, an economics professor at the University of Pennsylvania's Wharton School of Finance and Commerce, as well as the involvement of the American Association of University Professors in Nearing's case. It also analyzes the first Red Scare that was used to generate public panic about an impending revolution, the role of the New York legislature in promoting fears about the dangers of communism, and the consequences for academic freedom.

This chapter examines how the Supreme Court, led by Chief Justice Earl Warren, progressed from cautious incursions on some of the witch-hunt era's more drastic practices to its breakthrough decisions of June 17, 1957—so-called Red Monday—and the judicial retrenchment that followed. In the mid-1950s, the Supreme Court took cautious steps toward dismantling loyalty programs. The first sign of major change came in May 1957, in two cases where the Court found violations of due process and rejected the guilt-by-association rationale that had been critical to Vinson Court decisions upholding loyalty programs. One involved Rudolph Schware and the other, Raphael Konigsberg. Another case, this time involving Clinton Jencks, had major implications for the use of secret evidence in political cases. This chapter also discusses Warren's treatment of academic freedom in the case of Paul Sweezy and concludes with an analysis of the Supreme Court's decisions in cases involving test or loyalty oaths.

This chapter examines three Supreme Court cases involving teacher loyalty oaths—from Florida, Washington, and Arizona—that set the stage for Keyishian v. Board of Regents. Before discussing how Keyishian essentially led to the demise of statewide anti-subversive programs, the chapter considers the “Feinberg certificate,” which required employees to acknowledge that they had read New York's rules implementing the Feinberg Law and that these rules were terms of their employment. The Feinberg certificate required employees to deny that they were members of the Communist Party or, if they ever had been, to state that they had disclosed this fact to the president of the State University of New York. The chapter also looks at the Supreme Court case Baggett v. Bullitt, which challenges Washington State's two loyalty oaths and concludes with an analysis of Keyishian and its ramifications for academic freedom.

This chapter examines how the Supreme Court, led by Chief Justice Earl Warren, progressed from cautious incursions on some of the witch-hunt era's more drastic practices to its breakthrough decisions of June 17, 1957—so-called Red Monday—and the judicial retrenchment that followed. In the mid-1950s, the Supreme Court took cautious steps toward dismantling loyalty programs. The first sign of major change came in May 1957, in two cases where the Court found violations of due process and rejected the guilt-by-association rationale that had been critical to Vinson Court decisions upholding loyalty programs. One involved Rudolph Schware and the other, Raphael Konigsberg. Another case, this time involving Clinton Jencks, had major implications for the use of secret evidence in political cases. This chapter also discusses Warren's treatment of academic freedom in the case of Paul Sweezy and concludes with an analysis of the Supreme Court's decisions in cases involving test or loyalty oaths.

This chapter examines three Supreme Court cases involving teacher loyalty oaths—from Florida, Washington, and Arizona—that set the stage for Keyishian v. Board of Regents. Before discussing how Keyishian essentially led to the demise of statewide anti-subversive programs, the chapter considers the “Feinberg certificate,” which required employees to acknowledge that they had read New York's rules implementing the Feinberg Law and that these rules were terms of their employment. The Feinberg certificate required employees to deny that they were members of the Communist Party or, if they ever had been, to state that they had disclosed this fact to the president of the State University of New York. The chapter also looks at the Supreme Court case Baggett v. Bullitt, which challenges Washington State's two loyalty oaths and concludes with an analysis of Keyishian and its ramifications for academic freedom.

This chapter focuses on the Rapp-Coudert Committee's investigation of public schools and colleges in New York and the trajectory of the city's higher education institutions. The New York Teachers Union (TU) quickly responded to the 1940 law creating the Rapp-Coudert Committee to investigate subversion in the schools, organizing “Friends of the Free Public Schools” and raising more than $150,000 for a campaign against the pending probe. The subcommittee's chief attorney, Paul Windels, began the investigation by subpoenaing the TU's 6,000-strong membership list—a move that suggested an attempt to break the union. The chapter considers the legal challenges put up by New York professors against the Rapp-Coudert Committee, the anti-communist purges at the City College of New York, and the academic freedom debate sparked by the Rapp-Coudert probe.

This chapter focuses on the New York Teachers Union (TU) and its battles with the New York City Board of Education over the Feinberg Law during the late 1940s and early 1950s. In 1946, New York City Mayor William O'Dwyer filled a slot on the Board of Education with the appointment of George Timone, who would go on to spearhead the anti-communist purge throughout the city. This chapter looks at the case of the University of Washington to highlight the issue of academic freedom, in particular whether long-tenured, outstanding professors should be fired simply for being communists. It also examines the TU's opposition to the Feinberg Law and concludes by analyzing Supreme Court decisions in First Amendment cases in the 1940s, including United States v. Lovett.

This chapter examines events that set the stage for the Supreme Court decision in Keyishian v. Board of Regents invalidating New York State's Feinberg Law. It begins by discussing Arizona's perjury law and Barbara Elfbrandt's political and religious objections to it, along with the Supreme Court decision in the case that came to be known as Elfbrandt v. Russell. It then considers Richard Lipsitz's efforts to make Keyishian look as different as possible from Adler v. Board of Education, which had upheld the Feinberg Law. It also analyzes the Supreme Court majority and dissenting opinions in Keyishian as well as the reactions to the decision. Finally, it assesses the impact of Keyishian on academic freedom as a part of the First Amendment.

This chapter examines the New York Teachers Union's (TU) legal challenge to the Feinberg Law and the law's implications for academic freedom. The Supreme Court's First Amendment decisions in the 1930s and 1940s emboldened the TU in its fight against the Feinberg Law and filed suit in Brooklyn, with union president Abe Lederman as the lead plaintiff. Two other lawsuits were filed in Albany, one by the Communist Party and the other by state senator Fred Morritt on behalf of four teachers, a principal, and a former member of the New York City Board of Education. This chapter considers the early legal victories of the TU and other opponents of the Feinberg Law, with particular emphasis on the decisions of Judges Harry Schirick and Murray Hearn temporarily stopping the New York State Board of Regents from implementing the law. It also discusses the New York City Board of Education's attack on the TU and various teachers whom it accused of insubordination and “conduct unbecoming.”

This chapter focuses on the New York Teachers Union (TU) and its battles with the New York City Board of Education over the Feinberg Law during the late 1940s and early 1950s. In 1946, New York City Mayor William O'Dwyer filled a slot on the Board of Education with the appointment of George Timone, who would go on to spearhead the anti-communist purge throughout the city. This chapter looks at the case of the University of Washington to highlight the issue of academic freedom, in particular whether long-tenured, outstanding professors should be fired simply for being communists. It also examines the TU's opposition to the Feinberg Law and concludes by analyzing Supreme Court decisions in First Amendment cases in the 1940s, including United States v. Lovett.