BY JOHN K. WILSON

Earlier today, Boise State University lifted its suspension on 52 classes with 1300 students for UF 200: Foundations of Ethics & Diversity. This was a necessary correction to a serious mistake the administration made last week when it announced one of the largest attacks on academic freedom in American history, with 52 classes summarily suspended while an investigation began, but it appears that only an “online, asynchronous” format will be allowed for the classes, which is simply inadequate when full restoration is necessary.

As shocking as the extent of the suspension was, the reason for it was even more jaw-dropping: The university acted in response to rumors about a recording of a Zoom session in just one UF 200 class, a recording that the administration never saw and apparently doesn’t actually exist, since no one has been able to track down anyone who has seen it.

The university declared, “We have been made aware of a series of concerns, culminating in allegations that a student or students have been humiliated and degraded in class on our campus for their beliefs and values. This is never acceptable; it is not what Boise State stands for; and we will not tolerate this behavior.” The university noted, “Given the weight of cumulative concerns, we have determined that, effective immediately, we must suspend UF 200.”

English professor Kyle Boggs wrote on Twitter (and later deleted it because he was reporting what he had been told and did not have firsthand knowledge of it): “A student in a university foundations class taped a zoom discussion on white privilege, in which apparently a white student was made to feel uncomfortable, and sent the video to ID state legislature, who are ‘enraged.’ BSU suspended all UF 200 classes mid semester as a result.”

It’s unclear how the rumor of this class recording spread so widely, or whether there is any factual basis to it at all. But Boise State’s extreme overreaction to the rumor was entirely unjustified. Even if one instructor had done something terrible in one class, that would only justify (in the most extreme cases) suspending that instructor temporarily and finding a substitute to continue the class. It could not justify suspending all 52 classes in which there was no evidence of any misconduct.

University President Marlene Tromp and Interim Provost Tony Roark wrote to students in an email, “The university has suspended class meetings in order to allow an investigation to be conducted into a serious but nonspecific allegation (nonspecific relative to identifying individuals or course section).”

Even if a professor is accused of committing a serious violation, that professor should be entitled to due process before being punished by suspension from the class. But here, literally no one was accused of anything, and yet everyone was presumed guilty by fiat and suspended. This is the first case I’ve ever heard of on a college campus where there is no accuser, and there is no accused, and there is no complaint, and yet massive preemptive punishment has been imposed.

The lack of due process at Boise State was shocking. For any complaint against a professor, Boise State’s policy requires “a formal notice of allegations” and adds, “The notice will include: (a) information regarding the allegations of conduct prohibited under this policy including the date, location and a description of the conduct alleged to violate this policy…..” Unless Boise State sent a formal notice of allegations to the 35 faculty detailing the date, location, and description of the violation, those faculty are not Respondents to a complaint, and if they are not the subject of a complaint, they (and their classes) cannot be suspended. Since Boise State doesn’t know any date or location for this rumored violation, they could not have sent anyone a formal complaint that complies with the policy.

Of course, Boise State is free to investigate and look for evidence that might lead to a complaint, especially when they hear of a rumor about something serious. But they cannot apply any of the measures in their harassment policy, including interim suspensions, until they have a complaint, and they can only apply those measures to the target of a complaint.

In addition to the illegitimate suspension of the classes, Boise State administrators have violated the academic freedom of faculty in other ways. InsideHigherEd reported, “Several other faculty members did not respond to interview requests or said they could not comment until they were given permission to do so by the university communications office.”

Boise State spokesperson Mark Sharp noted, “Boise State University does not have a policy that restricts employees from speaking with the media. In this case, our focus has been on protecting the integrity of the investigation. Based on advice from counsel, UF 200 faculty were advised to forward media inquiries to the Office of Communications and Marketing in order to avoid compromising the integrity of the investigation.” The existence of an investigation cannot justify a ban on speaking to the media, which violates the First Amendment rights of both the faculty and the media seeking information.

While Boise State has an excessively restrictive confidentiality policy for harassment complaints, even that policy can only apply to the details of the actual complaint in question. A faculty member must always be free to publicly deny committing misconduct, and they must be free to criticize the unjustified suspension of their classes.

Most importantly, the rules on confidentiality can only apply to faculty when they are accused in a formal complaint, which never happened in this case. While the suspension of the classes has finally been lifted, it appears that the illegitimate gag order on faculty remains in place, and it must also be removed.

Boise State also banned communications between professors and students in the classes to protect “the integrity of the investigation.” This is ridiculous: The integrity of an investigation is not compromised by allowing free speech. A public university cannot ban all communications between 35 professors and 1300 students while they try to figure out if a rumor is true. Even if there were a real complaint of harassment (and there never was), confidentiality rules about the details of an investigation cannot extend to a wholesale ban on any communications between 35 professors and 1300 students.

While the Boise State administration has displayed an almost comical level of incompetence in overreacting to a rumor that appears to be false, and the administration showed total disregard for the rights of faculty and the educational needs of students by arbitrarily suspending all UF 200 classes, in their defense it should be noted that right-wing groups demanding censorship have put them under extraordinary pressure.

The right-wing Idaho Freedom Foundation noted, “The course suspension comes just hours before the Idaho Senate’s vote on Boise State’s budget.” At the same time that rumors about this Zoom meeting being sent to legislators were circulating, the Idaho legislature was planning a $409,000 budget cut for Boise State, because that was the amount the university reported spending on social justice programs. Sen. Carl Crabtree described the budget cut as a first step to control Idaho’s public colleges, noting that they will all be required to report all social justice spending and “They’re going to get the message.” The message from the legislature is pretty clear: Ban social justice or suffer financial consequences.

Cutting Boise State’s budget for allowing social justice teaching was considered a moderate position in the Idaho state senate. Sen. Steve Vick complained that the budget “only sends a message to Boise State University” instead of punishing all colleges for permitting social justice.

The Idaho state budget also bans any state college from using “appropriated funds” to “support social justice ideology student activities, clubs, events and organizations on campus.” This is an appalling, unconstitutional attack on free speech. The idea that the government in Idaho is openly seeking to ban students from discussing an “ideology” disliked by legislators is a shocking example of censorship.

The Idaho legislators are being pressured by right-wing nonprofits who demand censorship of liberal ideas on campus. A December 2020 report from the right-wing Idaho Freedom Foundation and the Claremont Institute declared that “eliminating social justice initiatives at Idaho’s universities is necessary for meaningful reform, as well as disrupting their ability to provide stable careers for social justice advocates.” The report called for the state legislature to act by “penalizing universities that continue to emphasize social justice education.” This report urged the state legislature to violate academic freedom and ban classes it deemed too liberal: “Direct the University to eliminate courses that are infused with social justice Ideology.” Leading right-wing think tanks are actively demanding a ban on courses based on their ideology. This is an example of conservative cancel culture far more extreme than anything pushed by left-wing activists.

The Idaho Freedom Foundation reported that the Boise State administration was extremely sensitive to the legislature: “Sources within the Dean’s council have told us that the university is scrubbing the word ‘diversity’ from its website because the Legislature does not like it. It is replacing ‘diversity’ with words like ‘equity, fairness, inclusion’ and so on.”

What does Boise State need to do in the face of censorship from its top officials and the legislature? First, the administration needs to profusely apologize for violating its own policies and the First Amendment, for infringing upon the rights of the faculty and smearing their reputations, and for harming students by disrupting their education through a wholly unwarranted suspension of all UF 200 classes.

Second, we need a full independent investigation of what the administration did, to uncover how this rumor started, why the administration overreacted, and if legislative attempts to censor liberal ideas on campus influenced the administration.

Third, Boise State needs to adopt new measures and policies to ensure that due process, academic freedom, and shared governance are protected on campus, and prevent political influence from censoring free thought on campus. Policies on harassment need to prevent the censorship of campus discussion about these issues. The practice of automatically suspending anyone accused of misconduct needs to be prohibited. And the campus should adopt policies declaring that administration will, as much as possible, resist efforts by politicians to silence freedom of thought on campus.

In response to the imagined crisis, the administration announced that “we will develop and deliver a series of professional development sessions for faculty on fostering learning environments characterized by mutual respect and addressing bias in the classroom.” If it turns out the faculty did nothing wrong, but the administration certainly did, shouldn’t the professional development sessions be focused on the administrators instead? In fact, the administration should fund a new Center on Intellectual Freedom, run by the faculty, which will help educate and train students, faculty, and–most of all–administrators about how to protect free thought on campus.

The Boise State debacle should be a lesson to college administrators everywhere. Colleges must be careful not to instantly believe any smear about so-called “woke” folks that gets tossed around. Colleges must investigate first, and only jump to punishment when there is strong evidence and penalty is justified. Colleges must improve their procedures and policies to protect due process. Colleges must have true shared governance and utilize faculty committees to investigate any allegations of misconduct in teaching. Colleges must resist political interference with clear principles rather than sacrificing scapegoats to powerful legislators. Colleges must have transparency and open debate rather than imposing gag orders on everyone. And when someone screws up royally, as Boise State administrators did so badly in this case, colleges must have systems of accountability where questions are fully answered and misconduct has consequences.