Court Rules in Favor of Academic Freedom
A Louisiana judge has ordered Louisiana State University (LSU) to fully reinstate tenured law professor Ken Levy, who was removed from his teaching duties last month after making vulgar remarks about Governor Jeff Landry and former President Donald Trump during a lecture.
The ruling, issued Tuesday by 19th Judicial District Judge Tarvald Smith, allows Levy to return to his classroom immediately. The decision follows a lawsuit Levy filed against LSU, arguing that his removal violated academic freedom and due process. The case has sparked a broader debate over free speech on college campuses, particularly when it involves political discourse.
“Everyone was vulnerable if I lost this,” Levy said outside the Baton Rouge courthouse. “So my win is their win.”
Controversial Remarks Led to Suspension
The dispute stems from an anonymous student complaint regarding comments Levy made on the first day of his criminal justice course in January. A transcript of a recording, shared in court and published by The Advocate, revealed that Levy used explicit language to criticize Landry and Trump.
“I couldn’t believe that f(asterisk)(asterisk)(asterisk)(asterisk)r won,” Levy said about Trump’s 2016 election victory. He also reportedly said, “f(asterisk)(asterisk)(asterisk) the governor” and joked that he could jail students for breaking his no-recording policy.
Levy has insisted that his remarks were made in a “joking manner,” a sentiment echoed by multiple students who testified in his defense. However, university officials swiftly removed him from teaching while launching an investigation.
Legal Battle Over Free Speech and Classroom Conduct
Levy’s attorney, Jill Craft, argued that his removal was a clear violation of his rights, stressing that professors must be free to express political opinions without fear of retaliation.
However, LSU’s attorney, Jimmy Faircloth Jr., countered that Levy had created a classroom environment that could be intimidating to students who held different political views. Faircloth also noted that Levy had not been fired but merely reassigned with full pay while the investigation continued.
In his ruling, Judge Smith dismissed LSU’s concerns, stating that criticism of politicians is a fundamental aspect of free expression.
“Negative comments about politicians are a way of life,” Smith said. “Your client should get back to the business of training lawyers and let professors teach.”
The judge also emphasized that law students, in particular, should be exposed to differing opinions and rigorous debate to prepare them for their future careers.
Governor Landry’s Role Sparks Controversy
Governor Jeff Landry, a Republican and vocal ally of Trump, has been at the center of discussions surrounding the case. Landry has pursued a strong conservative agenda, including laws requiring the Ten Commandments to be posted in public classrooms and restrictions on abortion pills.
After Levy’s remarks became public, Landry took to social media, calling the professor’s conduct unacceptable. Levy later testified that he received death threats following the governor’s post.
While some have questioned whether Landry influenced LSU’s decision, Faircloth dismissed such claims as a “conspiratorial narrative.” LSU President William Tate IV also testified that he acted independently in removing Levy, stating he “never talked to the governor about this matter.”
Professors and Students Fear Future Censorship
Levy’s case has raised concerns among faculty and students about potential political interference in academic discussions.
Professor Patrick Martin IV, who teaches jurisprudence, expressed apprehension about addressing controversial topics in class.
“Is it possible I’m going to be suspended?” Martin asked in court. “That’s a real fear.”
Others worry that the case sets a precedent for disciplining educators who challenge the views of elected officials.
With the court ruling in Levy’s favor, the debate over free speech in Louisiana’s public universities is far from over. The case highlights growing tensions between political leaders and academic institutions, with implications for classroom discussions nationwide.
