Scholastic Gag Orders: NDAs, Mandatory Arbitration, and the Legal Threat to Academics - The James G. Martin Center for ...
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
Scholastic Gag Orders:
NDAs, Mandatory Arbitration,
and the Legal Threat to
Academics
By Stephen Baskerville
January 2021
Introduction Both mechanisms enable institutions to
conceal unethical conduct that would bring
As radical activists serve as self-appointed public condemnation upon them. Both
censors in our cultural institutions, attention conservatives and liberals consider their
has focused on the militants’ use unethical because they protect
quasi-Bolshevik tactics. But much less administrators from legal liability and
attention has focused on the absence of criticism while leaving scholars in legal
resistance: the silence of able-minded jeopardy and possibly even at risk of
scholars, whose talents and learning could criminal punishments.1
fight intimidation, and the failure of nerve by
institutional leaders who could gain Because secrecy is the overriding
overwhelming public support. imperative, information is difficult to obtain.
These mechanisms exist to conceal, and
Colleges and universities now respond not the mechanisms are themselves concealed
by defiantly defending their principles, but and disguised. We cannot know therefore
by devising new and secretive methods to how many and which institutions use them.
rid themselves of the faculty who resist Nevertheless, recent scandals involving
intimidation—without the world knowing. Evangelical institutions show that they
seem to be especially popular at religiously
Two methods provide a veil of legally affiliated colleges, though nothing suggests
enforced secrecy that shields institutions that they aren’t used by public universities
from negative publicity, professional
censure, and even oversight:
non-disclosure/disparagement agreements 1
Jeremiah Poff, “Conservative Professor Says
and mandatory arbitration. Baptist Seminary Used COVID as an Excuse to
Get Rid of Him,” The College Fix, 26 May 2020.
American Association of University Professors,
“Say No to NDAs and Forced Arbitration in
Higher Education,” 7 September 2018.
1
1as well.2 Apparently, “higher education Scholars must understand what
institutions that pursue unique missions can
is taking place. They need to
also be susceptible to unique governance
pitfalls.”3
defend their profession and
sound the alarm so the public
This battle involves more than academic understands what is at stake.
freedom. It concerns the power to take
control of entire universities and leverage
The process goes something like this:
the legal system to eliminate whoever is in
Universities can terminate professors (with
the way. Scholars must understand what is
or without tenure) without warning, instantly
taking place. They need to defend their
cutting them off from their livelihood and
profession and sound the alarm so the
the grievance procedures and oversight
public understands what is at stake. Shared
bodies of the university. If the professor
governance, the voices of faculty and
renounces their legal claims, waiving
faculty assemblies, and effective oversight
statutory and constitutional rights, and
by governing boards are also endangered.
promises silence, then the university may
Even the constitutional integrity of the
temporarily restore salary as “hush
judiciary itself is potentially undermined.
money.”4 This insulates administrators from
accountability, for both the termination
itself and any other ethical or political
Non-Disclosure/Disparagement
issues leading to the dismissal. It inverts
Agreements the law itself into an instrument of extortion.
Non-disclosure agreements (NDAs) may The professor becomes legally punishable
serve legitimate business purposes. for disclosing the institution’s contractual
Non-disparagement agreements (not breach. Colleagues, students, prospective
always the same thing) are inherently students, and faculty are all kept in the dark
unethical, at least in academia, because about it happening. Even oversight bodies
ipso facto they violate academic freedom charged with ensuring the institution’s
and conceal other ethical violations. integrity—faculty senates, accreditors, and
the institution’s own governing
boards—can be kept unaware of their use.5
2
The use of NDAs at public universities are
rarely publicized, making them hard to track. The most effective recourse to politically
Purdue University Global attracted negative
publicity in 2018 for a broadly written motivated dismissals—going to the press to
nondisclosure agreement that it required faculty draw public attention—is precisely what the
members to sign. Goldie Blumenstyk, “Do
NDA forbids.
Corporate-Style NDAs Have a Place in Higher
Ed?,” The Chronicle of Higher Education, 4
4
September 2018. Poff, “Conservative Professor Says…”
3 5
Christian Barnard, “Liberty University: A Lawrence Fuqua, “SBTS Trustee Sees Serious
Cautionary Tale,” James G. Martin Center for Problems at Al Mohler’s Seminary,” Capstone
Academic Renewal, 25 October 2019. Report, 29 November 2020.
2
2Like any restriction on freedom of creating “a culture of fear where people are
expression, the scope of an NDA is unclear unable to speak out.”6 Buried in Politico’s
and broad enough to scare professors prurient accounts is the revelation that
away from even publishing academic Liberty uses “non-disclosure agreements
articles on the topic. A professional article that stop current and former staff and
on NDAs written by a professor who signed board members from discussing sensitive
an NDA could potentially open them up to matters” (emphasis added).7
legal action, as could publicly defending
their own integrity and reputation. Multiple dismissals of conservative
professors at two important Baptist
The only possible purpose for university theological seminaries, allegedly for their
administrators to demand a professor sign dissent on the institution promoting leftist
an NDA in an academic setting is to hide theories of sexuality, race, and “social
suspicious conduct by administrators, justice,” were likewise accompanied by
especially surrounding a dismissal. Thus, NDAs.8 A conservative professor fired from
NDAs invariably prohibit divulging their own a prominent theological seminary for similar
existence. One actual non-disparagement reasons was given a severance package
agreement, used by Patrick Henry College combined with an NDA, though he cannot
(a non-denominational Christian institution), discuss the case, which is precisely the
reads: purpose. Another refused to sign but is
reluctant to talk because his case is
● Dr. [X] agrees that he will not covered by mandatory arbitration
disclose the terms of this agreement (discussed below).
at any time to anyone.
● Dr. [X] agrees that he will not at any “I am appalled by Evangelical Christian use
time disparage [the College], its of Non-Disclosure Agreements to prevent
affiliates or related organizations,
directors, officers, employees, or
6
students in any way. Barnard, “Liberty University...”
7
Brandon Ambrosino, “‘Someone’s Gotta Tell
● Dr. [X] that he will not initiate the Freakin’ Truth’: Jerry Falwell’s Aides Break
communication in any fashion at any Their Silence,” Politico, 9 September 2019.
Maggie Severns et al., “‘They All Got Careless’:
time with anyone directly or
How Falwell Kept His Grip on Liberty Amid
indirectly associated with any Sexual ‘Games,’ Self-Dealing,” Politico, 1
accrediting agency. November 2020.
8
Robert Oscar Lopez, “COVID-19 Completes
Liberal Takeover of Southern Baptist
As noted, such devices seem to have Convention,” American Thinker, 23 April 2020.
special appeal for Evangelical institutions. Lopez introduced a resolution at the Southern
Baptist Convention condemning NDAs as
Even before President Jerry Falwell Jr.’s unethical, shortly before himself being fired from
recent disgrace, Liberty University was Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary,
allegedly for his stance on homosexual politics.
criticized for using NDAs to silence Robert Oscar Lopez, “Liberty’s Future is
dissenting faculty and even trustees and Predictable, Based on the 2018 Paige Patterson
Case,” 23 April 2019.
3
3further discussion of concerns,” Robert Second, business executives who do not
Gagnon of Houston Baptist University understand academic ethics often run
wrote. “I expect this of left-wing ‘liberal’ conservative institutions and assume NDAs
denominational structures, not Evangelical can serve legitimate purposes, as they do
institutions.” He continued: in the business world. One college
president, also a corporate executive, told
It gives the appearance of being the author that “Separation
hush money. A professor who has agreements…are common in the
served faithfully for…years should employment world, both for businesses and
not be forced to muzzle himself and non-profits,” after firing a professor who
violate conscience as a condition for could have told him why it is not equivalent.
receiving even a couple of months
of salary.9 These institutions also mostly lack tenure
because they want the (perfectly legitimate)
Tom Rush, a trustee at Southern Baptist option of dismissing faculty who deviate
Theological Seminary, went on record from the institution’s religious principles.
recently saying that “this contract was But this habit can serve the il-legitimate
unethical” and that “it was hush money to purpose of punishing healthy dissent and
keep them [fired professors] quiet.” Rush constructive criticism and protecting
pointed out that “They allegedly were being administrators’ arbitrary power (including
terminated for financial reasons, but if administrations that themselves deviate
that’s the case, why silence them?”10 from the religious principles). Because
institutions must still profess to respect
Why this proclivity among Evangelical academic freedom on non-doctrinal
colleges? matters and fear criticism, such dismissals
must be hidden.
First, they loathe controversy and avoid
engaging in public debate.11 “The church
has a bad habit of keeping things secret. Mandatory Arbitration
They want to keep it in house, take care of
it in house,” a former dean at Liberty said. Yet refusing to sign an NDA is no panacea.
“And Liberty’s the same way.”12
Faculty contracts now contain mandatory
9
“Top Baptist Professor: Al Mohler’s Strong-Arm arbitration (MA) clauses (often disguised),
Tactics Are ‘Sub-Christian,’” Capstone Report,
26 May 2020. requiring that “employment disputes” be
10
Lawrence Fuqua, “Trustee Reveals Disturbing adjudicated in secrecy by private
Look Inside of Albert Mohler’s SBTS,” Capstone
Report, 28 November 2020. The quotations are arbitrators.13 Here, too, professors are
the article’s paraphrases of Rush’s more instantly cut off from their salaries, the
extended comments, which can be verified from
the video starting at 14:10.
11 13
Stephen Baskerville, “The Crisis of the Jason P. Baily, “Mandatory Arbitration in
Christian Colleges,” Crisis, 17 August 2017. Higher Ed Employment Contracts,” Browne
12
Severns et al., “‘They All Got Careless’…” House Law Group, 11 July 2018.
4
4courts, grievance procedures, oversight transactions of ordinary people.”16 (Your
bodies, and, most importantly, collegial and inbox probably contains a dozen notices
public opinion. They can object only in a changing your “terms of service” to
secret proceeding run by lawyers, not arbitration with everyone from banks to
academic colleagues, who can suppress retailers).
ethical questions because proceedings are
closed and without record, and public Arbitration discards accepted legal norms
disclosure is punished. and procedures, including due process
protections. Arbitrators (enjoying legal
As with NDAs, we cannot know how many immunity) have no specified limits on what
faculty members get purged because awards or punishments they can inflict,
secrecy is the whole point. including unlimited punitive damages and
lawyers’ fees. Nothing requires that they
Mandatory arbitration, too, may serve follow the law, and yet their secretive
legitimate purposes among business firms. decisions are enforced by civil (and even
But even in non-academic contexts, MA criminal) courts with almost no opportunity
has been harshly criticized for depriving for challenge or appeal. One firm’s rules
individuals of statutory and constitutional (used by educational institutions) include
14
rights. these departures from open justice:
Standard MA requires parties to forego ● Proceedings are secret, with
redress in the courts and instead submit participants bound to silence; no
disputes to secret binding arbitration. record or transcript is kept or
Ethical criticisms arose when businesses permitted; and no access by public,
began imposing the practice on individual press, or family.
employees and consumers (which was ● No guarantees for contractual,
originally prohibited). Institutional clients statutory, or constitutional rights.
allegedly enjoy superior leverage over ● Rules of evidence are explicitly
isolated individuals, dictate the arbitration discarded, with no requirement to
clauses (often supplied by the arbitration record evidence or explain
firms), and collude with arbitrators. 15 decisions.
MA is now an “epidemic.” This privatized ● Proceedings cannot be stopped,
judiciary “has largely displaced the civil and one cannot withdraw.
justice system for most of the major ● Decisions, damages, and
punishments in absentia, without
parties present to defend
14 themselves.
Katherine V.W. Stone and Alexander J.S.
Colvin, “The Arbitration Epidemic: Mandatory ● No limits on arbitrators’ rulings, their
Arbitration Deprives Workers and Consumers of scope or relevance to merits, issues,
their Rights,” Economic Policy Institute Briefing
Paper #414, 7 December 2015. or facts.
15
Arguments are summarized in Stone and
16
Colvin, “Arbitration Epidemic.” Stone and Colvin, “Arbitration Epidemic,” 16.
5
5● Damages and fees can be imposed Academic freedom and other
without finding legal culpability.
● Decisions are without appeal, legally
ethical principles become
binding, and enforced by courts subsumed into an “employment
before which parties cannot present dispute” which excludes one’s
their case. academic colleagues from any
● Unlimited fees can be imposed on
parties who can be prevented from
role.
presenting their side of a case,
including defending themselves, fairness and impartiality.19 Incentives
until fees are paid. governing business, though, are mostly
● No separation of powers or checks irrelevant in higher education.
and balances in arbitrators’
selection or powers.17
Secrecy and Faculty Rights
Arbitrators can even issue restraining
orders that carry criminal penalties. This Higher education brings even more serious
constitutionally questionable tool allows a dynamics into play because of MA’s
personalized criminal code to be legislated greatest asset to institutions: secrecy.20
around a legally innocent individual, Unorthodox professors can be airbrushed
imposing criminal punishments for doing out of an institution, gagged, and placed
what no statute prohibits and what anyone under possible legal liability for objecting
else may do. Punishments include publicly. Academic freedom and other
mandatory incarceration without trial, even ethical principles become subsumed into
when the infringement is inadvertent or an “employment dispute” which excludes
unavoidable—which it may well be, since it one’s academic colleagues from any role.
only prohibits otherwise legal acts.18
19
Despite enormous potential for injustice, Stone and Colvin, “Arbitration Epidemic.”
20
Despite widespread criticism in employment
arbitration is defended in business settings contracts generally, the implications for
because arbitrators seek a reputation for academic freedom are unexplored. Students
subject to similar provisions discover
comparable implications: “Because the
enrollment contracts typically include gag
17
Information about arbitration comes from clauses that prevent students from sharing
Stone and Colvin, “Arbitration Epidemic,” and information about their complaint and the results
similar articles cited below, from the Guidelines of the arbitration with outside parties, their
for Christian Conciliation (January 2019) of the complaints are effectively silenced. They are
Institute for Christian Conciliation (used by heard only through a secretive process that
educational institutions as discussed here), and prevents information from becoming public
from discussions with attorneys, who through the court system—ultimately shielding
unanimously confirm that the harshest bad actors from public accountability.” Anthony
interpretations of arbitration regulations are all Walsh, “States Should Act to Prohibit Mandatory
possibilities under arbitration law as currently Arbitration in College Enrollment Contracts,” The
written and practiced. Century Foundation, 26 May 2020. Of course,
18
Stephen Baskerville, Taken Into Custody student complaints raise wholly different issues
(Nashville: Cumberland House, 2007), 177-186. from academic freedom for faculty.
6
6Larger ethical contexts then become institution and twist the knife on any
irrelevant, and students, donors, trustees, recalcitrant faculty who questions its
senates, accreditors, and the public will reputation for integrity. Criticizing the
never know. college’s ethics, including the arbitration
procedure itself, undermines both the
Instead, lawyers “settle” everything in college’s credibility and the arbitration
secret arbitration. The dispute will be firm’s entire selling point.
reduced to material issues, with ethical
principles ignored. Regardless of material Whether or not the arbitrators would act as
awards, the institution wins the important ruthlessly as they can, the open-ended
battle before the procedure ever begins possibilities of legal action provide a clear
because the secrecy keeps its reputation threat that will intimidate anyone. When
intact, regardless of how unethical its your aim is to shut someone’s mouth, the
actions. MA cannot address ethical threat is everything. “While [Baptist
violations because it is itself the principal seminary President Al] Mohler says he
method of enabling and concealing those wouldn’t take the former professors who
violations in the first place. signed such an agreement to court, he says
that threatening them works.” This refers to
Even if professors decline to claim an NDA, but the point is the same.21
damages for unjust firings, they cannot be
certain that any public criticism they make Even vindicating one’s reputation by
will not trigger an arbitration procedure divulging larger ethical or political issues
against them by the institution. In absentia, behind one’s dismissal (e.g. to a
one could potentially be forced to pay prospective employer) could bring
exorbitant damages and massive legal fees, retribution. (Few will believe the favorite
since no rules limit the amount. pretext of “budget cuts”). Suspicion of
having signed an NDA (and taken “hush
Why would arbitrators act so unjustly? money”) may also compromise one’s
professional integrity, as some academics
In education, material settlements are trivial or administrators may assume signing an
compared to the procedure itself. The NDA is complicity in wrongdoing.22
arbitration firm is selling the power to A larger danger arises here: Faculty
silence and intimidate faculty. It offers governance could disappear altogether, as
universities a no-lose proposition: You may
have to pay some damages, but your
reputation is guaranteed to remain intact so 21
Fuqua, “Trustee Reveals Disturbing Look…”
22
long as the professor can be kept quiet. At least one professor lauds his colleagues’
refusal to sign. “Irrespective of whether
Professors [Russell] Fuller and [Jim] Orrick are
Given the lack of restraints on damages right or wrong in their accusations [against
Southern Baptist Theological Seminary]…they
described above, the firm has both the come across by their actions in not signing the
means and the incentive to collude with the NDA as having more courage and integrity.”
“Top Baptist Professor...”
7
7higher ed bureaucrats gain more power and Faculty governance could
control by using NDAs and MA.
Administrations can suppress any dissent
disappear altogether, as higher
or criticism about their leadership (or any ed bureaucrats gain more power
topic) and render grievance procedures and control by using NDAs and
useless. All looks serene because no MA.
controversy can surface in the first place.
Faculty are reduced to hired hands. Yet those objections may distract from a
larger issue, a sleight-of-hand that
disguises standard MA with an aura of
The Peculiar World of Religious religious sanctimony. For it is not clear that
Arbitration religious arbitration contains anything
religious at all. At least with the Christian
Eliminating divergent views is advanced by version (used by educational institutions), it
the most controversial version of MA: simply replicates standard mandatory
religious arbitration (RA). This, too, has arbitration sprinkled with Bible verses.
been criticized in other areas for entangling
church and state,23 violating religious RA invokes religious faith for commercial
24
freedom, and even establishing Sharia gain. Behind the smiles, fee-charging and
law.25 With secrecy effectively immunizing profit-making firms develop a market for
them from public criticism, Christian “Christian” arbitration. This gives the firm
organizations appear to be erecting a (one dominates the market) a further
framework to penalize “Christophobia,” incentive to collude with employers, such
copying prohibitions on “Islamophobia” and as colleges, who support their monopoly by
“homophobia.”26 embedding arbitration clauses into
employment contracts. (Some college
contracts replicate the principal firm’s
23
Brian Hutler, “Religious Arbitration and the suggested language verbatim). Without
Establishment Clause,” Ohio State Journal on
Dispute Resolution, vol. 33, no. 3 (2018), 338, competitors, incentives to impartiality cited
340. Sophia Chua-Rubenfeld and Frank Costa, by MA’s defenders do not really apply to
“The Reverse-Entanglement Principle: Why
Religious Arbitration of Federal Rights Is
the Christian version.
Unconstitutional,” Yale Law Journal, vol. 128,
no. 7 (2019), 2120, 2087, 2099, 2105. The pitfalls are further obfuscated by the
24
Nicholas Walter, “Religious Arbitration in the
United States and Canada,” Santa Clara Law religious-therapeutic veneer. Labeled as
Review, vol. 52, no. 2 (2012), 504, 566. “Christian Conciliation,” it claims to
25
Courts apparently have already upheld
arbitration decisions based on Sharia law.
“conciliate” disagreements to avoid
Chua-Rubenfeld and Costa, litigating them, promising a less
“Reverse-Entanglement Principle,” 2095. Walter, “adversarial” alternative that redeems
“Religious Arbitration,” 569.
26
Christian arbitrators equate criticism of their antagonists spiritually (“change their
clients with criticism of Christianity itself,
rationalizing the secrecy “to prevent a public criticize and mock Christianity.” Guidelines for
quarrel that would give others an opportunity to Christian Conciliation, 12.
8
8attitudes and behavior”). The therapeutic The Model: Christian Colleges as
camouflage further moves the process Political-Business Empires
away from justice. Organizations jumping
onto the mandatory arbitration bandwagon It is ironic that Christian colleges are not
for self-interested reasons can advertise it only joining their secular counterparts in
as spiritual uplift for those they plan to purging faculty but using methods that
injure. weaponize their religion in such a
mercenary fashion. One might wonder what
Replacing justice with moral improvement kind of ethics and theology these
may leave their potential future adversaries institutions teach.
feeling good, but they have also lost any
recourse against unjust and arbitrary This use of MA becomes comprehensible
judgements. when one understands the political
dynamic driving some Evangelical
Whether operated by the American institutions. Though nothing so sinister as
Arbitration Association or relabeled by the the “theocracy” suspected by their
Institute for Christian Conciliation (ICC, a detractors,28 it is still enough to vitiate
firm with clients in higher education), the authentic institutions of higher learning.
reality is the same. ICC’s Guidelines for
Christian Conciliation27
make very clear that Often founded by conservative political
what they are practicing is simply standard moguls29 as components of their
MA. In fact, its Guidelines actually prevent political-business empires, the newer,
people from using moral pressure alone alternative Evangelical institutions can
and can punish them for it—moral pressure exhibit “a governance model that place[s]
would defeat the secrecy and make the too much power in the hands of one
arbitrators superfluous. person.”30 Rarely do they offer more than
their secular counterparts when it comes to
What religious arbitration offers is another
critically examining ideas and society, and
way for Christian colleges to bypass public
they are determined to keep faculty on a
(and legal) scrutiny. It enables colleges to
tight rein.31 The empire expands primarily
avoid the legal liability, public scrutiny, and
by placing students in influential positions
impartiality that comes with a non-secretive
of political power.
process. The business product being sold
here is not reconciling people who
disagree, but eliminating them. 28
Hanna Rosin, God’s Harvard: A Christian
College on a Mission to Save America (New
York: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, 2007).
29
Emma Green, “Liberty University Students
Want to Be Christians–Not Republicans,” The
27
This is the version most often cited in law Atlantic, 26 October 2016.
30
review articles and litigated in cases. See Barnard, “Liberty University.”
31
Chua-Rubenfeld and Cost, Stephen Baskerville, “Jerry Falwell, Jr. and the
“Reverse-Entanglement Principle,” 2094-2098, Tragedy of Christian Higher Education,” New
2101-2102. English Review, September 2020.
9
9Liberty University’s mission, for example, integrity of an institution of higher
aims to “train champions for Christ,” and education.
Jerry Falwell proclaimed, “We’re turning out
moral revolutionaries.” Despite the Religious or secular, contractual clauses
ostensible liberal arts ethos, procuring jobs that gag professors present a unique threat
becomes an end in itself, eclipsing “critical to academic freedom in higher education.
thinking,” and education itself becomes NDAs and MA deprive the institution of
secondary.32 The pipeline of jobs and faculty voices that can help ensure the
influence must be protected at all costs. centrality of academics and the pursuit of
truth.
Nothing endangers that influence so much
as controversy, and so faculty are treated The most debilitating feature of this legal
as hired hands who are expected to teach climate is the admission of intellectual
and otherwise keep quiet. Criticizing the incapacity by institutions of learning. When
wrong people or deviating from boilerplate self-interest is at stake, high-minded
conservatism could block the pipeline. pretenses about the exchange of ideas give
way to high-level administrators quietly
Colleges become another vehicle of stabbing their colleagues in the back and
political influence, with students and faculty stopping the mouths of critics with legal
as pawns in the game—not prophets or threats. These actions constitute an open
intellectuals who critically assess ideas. admission that colleges have become
havens for intellectually incapable people
whose professional competence, by their
Conclusion own judgement, is insufficient when their
own interest is at stake.33
Whether motivated by a desire for political
influence or the self-perpetuating desire to If institutions continue to use
protect their reputation and avoid non-disparagement agreements,
accountability, NDAs and MA threaten the mandatory arbitration, and other legal
mechanisms to deal with criticism and
32
These institutions usually start life with a
contradiction. Their initial claim to superiority
33
involves returning to the traditional liberal-arts John Ellis writes that “Large numbers of
curriculum deserted by mainstream academia. people holding professorial titles have neither
Because they are essentially political operations, any real interest in academic work, nor aptitude
however, they soon become dominated by for it” and attributes the “breakdown of higher
applied courses that train their cadres in education” to “a concentration of people who
techniques of political activism and power, such don’t really belong in academia but are now
as journalism, pre-law, business, law numerous enough there to control it, to abuse it
enforcement, and security studies. Taught by for their own selfish purposes, and effectively to
practitioners rather than scholars, these subjects destroy it.” Ellis’ account points to a
are perceived by students as advantageous for preponderance of left-wing ideologues but
their careers and quickly drive out the liberal allows that it is not necessarily limited to
arts, while functionaries drive out the scholars. professors alone nor to leftists among them. The
One college offers the doublespeak of “Applied Breakdown of Higher Education (New York:
Liberal Arts.” Encounter, 2020), 182.
10
10fights over academic freedom, the public About the Author
should be more skeptical of the classroom Stephen Baskerville, PhD, has worked for
instruction they offer and the scholarship 30+ years in universities in the United
produced in their Ivory towers. States and Europe. His publications include
The New Politics of Sex: Civil Liberties and
the Growth of Governmental Power (2017),
and Not Peace But a Sword: The Political
Theology of the English Revolution (1993,
expanded 2018), plus peer-reviewed
articles on politics, law, history, religion,
and higher education. In July 2019, he was
dismissed as Professor of Government
from Patrick Henry College.
About the Martin Center
The James G. Martin Center for Academic
Renewal is a private nonprofit institute
dedicated to improving higher education
policy. Our mission is to renew and fulfill
the promise of higher education in North
Carolina and across the country.
We advocate responsible governance,
viewpoint diversity, academic quality,
cost-effective education solutions, and
innovative market-based reform. We do
that by studying and reporting on critical
issues in higher education and
recommending policies that can create
change—especially at the state and local
level.
353 E. Six Forks Road, Suite 200
Raleigh, NC 27609
919.828.1400
jamesgmartin.center
11
11You can also read
