ALYSSA BUMP
Editor in Chief
CHLOE KOWALYK
News Editor
The First Amendment states, “Congress shall make no law … abridging freedom of speech, or of the press.” Even though the amendment reads that Congress cannot interfere with these freedoms, the Supreme Court has protected speakers against all government agencies, including federal, state and local jurisdictions. As SUNY Fredonia is a state school, not a private institution, these freedoms are protected by the state and the college.
According to Mike Igoe, an attorney and associate professor of journalism at SUNY Fredonia, “It used to be that the First Amendment was applied a little bit differently to kids and colleges and any educational setting. It was very pro-student, but now it [has] shifted the other way, in favor of pro-administration.” Pro-administration should not be confused with the undying support of professors at a university. Rather, it is the focus of the people that manage the university, such as the President’s Office.
When it comes to the First Amendment, many citizens are unsure of what limitations exist within our freedoms. Not all speech is indeed protected by the First Amendment. Some exceptions in extreme cases include: incitement, defamation, threats and obscenity. These restrictions have come to fruition through various Supreme Court cases.
Contrary to popular belief, no exceptions exist for hate speech in the First Amendment. According to an article titled “Permissible restrictions on expression” from britannica.com, “Racist threats are unprotected by the First Amendment alongside other threats … such speech may not be specially punished because it is racist, sexist, antigay or hostile to some religion.”
However, free speech is limited on government property, as well as in government-run institutions, to a certain degree. Igoe explained that “if the government tries to restrict speech, they have to prove two things: you have to show a compelling government interest, meaning it’s something important… and number two, if they restrict speech, they cannot do any more than is necessary.”
In fact, government employees, which includes SUNY Fredonia professors, could technically be fired for “saying things that interfere with the employer’s efficiency,” according to britannica.com. This means it could be argued that Dr. Stephen Kershnar, the tenured SUNY Fredonia philosophy professor in question, could be fired under the grounds of disrupting the educational process at SUNY Fredonia.
Igoe explained that “not all types of speech are protected by the First Amendment, and the types of speech and the facts of the case are a very important aspect.”
It is important to note, however, that the First Amendment may protect speakers from being censored, but it does not protect them from facing the consequences of what they say from the public. Freedom of speech goes both ways — observers can choose to respond to what is being said through shunning, expressing disapproval and peacefully protesting.
In Kershnar’s case, the speech in question revolves around adult-child sex and other seemingly controversial topics. However, being a professor at SUNY Fredonia gives Kershnar academic freedom. As a philosophy professor, Kershnar has used the argument that part of being a philosopher and professor is to debate ideas, even those that the public may find to be extremely objectionable or offensive.
According to the Organization of American Historians, academic freedom is “the principle of freedom of expression for scholars engaged in discipline-related teaching, learning, research, publication and service.” Simply put, academic freedom protects educators’ rights to perform research and debate various topics without fear of sanction. This freedom is important for students, educators and the public as a whole because it allows the cultivation of new ideas and research.
Just like free speech, academic freedom also has limitations. According to “Defining Academic Freedom” by Cary Nelson, academic freedom does not protect an educator from investigations into allegations, misconduct or violations. It also does not protect faculty members from sanctions for “poor performance.”
On top of having academic freedom, Kershnar is also tenured. Tenure is a long-term contract with a professor that guarantees employment that can only be terminated under extraordinary circumstances. However, there are criticisms concerning tenure. Ernst Benjamin of the American Association of University Professors, some argue that “tenure creates excessive social, as well as individual, costs because unproductive tenured faculty limit opportunities for new faculty and programmatic innovation.”
Tenured professors are protected from unfair layoffs, but they are not protected from being fired completely. They do have a right to a hearing before being fired, and the process to fire someone that is tenured isn’t impossible. It is just much harder to do so.
The process of being tenured standardly consists of being reviewed six years after starting the position. According to academicpositions.com, the review looks into a professor’s contribution in three areas — research, teaching and service to the university. The professor also must put together a dossier, which normally consists of a CV, publications, a teaching portfolio and a few other things that summarize why the professor is fit for tenure. Simply put, the tenure process is normally complex and hard to do. It reviews everything a professor has done that makes them deserving of the tenure title.
Some have been critical of the fact that Kershnar was ever tenured in the first place. According to a post on Twitter from @kirbwyrd, “The fact that Stephen Kershnar has tenure makes me respect the concept of tenure even less.”
Igoe described the Kershnar situation as being a three-pronged event. “You’ve got the First Amendment. You’ve got academic freedom. And then, you’ve got what will the school do?” As of Feb. 5, neither the college nor the union have taken action against Kershnar, and the union likely won’t take action until the university does so first.
On Feb. 3, SUNY Fredonia’s president Stephen Kolison wrote this in a statement to all students, faculty and staff via email: “Please allow me to reiterate my earlier statement that I view the content of the video as absolutely abhorrent. I cannot stress strongly enough that the independent viewpoints of this individual professor are in no way representative of the values of the SUNY Fredonia campus.”
Igoe believes that “Kolison is absolutely within his rights to speak out against the fallout from this.” Kolison too is protected by the First Amendment, which allows him to separate the values of the college and those of Kershnar. Kolison is “within his rights,” according to Igoe, by creating a division between the university’s views and Kershnar’s views — since Kershnar’s comments on podcasts and in his blogs may have created an environment that makes students and colleagues feel uncomfortable.
While many people want Kershnar to be fired, this situation is more convoluted than it appears upon first glance. There are several factors at play, and this process will most likely take some time before it is fully resolved.