home

Legal Experts: Ward Churchill's Job is Safe

By Jeralyn, Section Civil Liberties
Posted on Sat Feb 05, 2005 at 10:31:02 AM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

The Rocky Mountain News has extensive coverage of Ward Churchill today, including an article that quotes legal experts, including Churchill's veteran and prominent civil liberties attorney, David Lane, who explain why Churchill's job is not in danger. Unless, of course, Colorado wants to pay some big bucks to Churchill when it loses the lawsuit Churchill would file over such a firing.

I agree, particulary with the point that because the University of Colorado is a publicly funded institution, Churchill's job actually is safer than it would be if he were teaching at a private college like the University of Denver.

Here are excerpts from an interview with Churchill conducted at his home Friday. He is not sorry, and he will fight back.

Here is the text of a memo from C.U. President Elizabeth Hoffman to university faculty yesterday on academic freedom.

Churchill will be speaking at the University of Colorado in Boulder on Tuesday night. Churchill has arranged for personal security.

Jim Lindgren at the Volokh Conspiracy analyzes academic freedom and Churchill in the context of the 1967 Kalven Report which explained why universities should not take a political position on public policy issues.

Other legal experts saying Churchill should not be fired: Law Profs Glenn Reynolds of Instpundit and Eugene Volokh of Volokh Conspiracy (here as well.) And Kevin Heller of the Yin Blog was a student of Churchill's and "enjoyed his classes immensely."

Update: Churchill definitely is a man willing to say "bring it on" to the legal system over a matter of principle. He was one of eight protesters arrested at the Columbus Day march in Denver last October. Recently, he and eight others took the case to trial. David Lane was chief counsel. The jury acquitted all of them.

Interesting footnote on whether Churchill improperly claimed to be an American Indian. The newspaper, Indian Country, which says it is the leading news source for American Indians, in naming the 8 acquitted defendants, cites Churchill's membership in A.I.M. and lists the tribe affiliation of native Americans among those acquitted. It has mentions Churchill's AIM membership but no affiliation for Churchill. I take this as an indication that Churchill never represented himself as a Native Amercian to the group. One can be an activist for a group without being one of its members. Update: My indication is wrong since Churchill is listed as a "Ketoowah Cherokee" on AIM's website in the leadership council section .

< RIP: Ossie Davis | On Ward Churchill and the Concept of Collective Guilt >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Legal Experts: Ward Churchill's Job is Safe | 32 comments (32 topical)
    Re: Legal Experts: Ward Churchill's Job is Safe (none / 0) (#1)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Feb 05, 2005 at 11:14:57 AM EST
    et al - If CU concludes that he should be fired, they should do so. And then defend their actions. Otherwise they will have caved into a threat. You can't run a Univeresity system doing that.

    Re: Legal Experts: Ward Churchill's Job is Safe (none / 0) (#3)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Feb 05, 2005 at 04:29:08 PM EST
    dadler - Not to be too blunt, but that is pure BS. No, we are not perfect, but we have done more civilization in the past 100 years than the rest of the world combined. And if you don't understand that, then your view of the world is warped beyond repair.

    Re: Legal Experts: Ward Churchill's Job is Safe (none / 0) (#4)
    by clio on Sat Feb 05, 2005 at 04:39:07 PM EST
    PPJ, Just curious. Have you ever traveled abroad in other than a tour group?

    Re: Legal Experts: Ward Churchill's Job is Safe (none / 0) (#5)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Feb 05, 2005 at 04:49:36 PM EST
    I don't think Churchill's rants are all that different from garden variety left wing rants that can commonly be heard on college campuses or anti-globalization riots. He should simply be ignored as are all other fring people as long as they don't get violent. He has gotten way too much ink already.

    Re: Legal Experts: Ward Churchill's Job is Safe (none / 0) (#6)
    by jimcee on Sat Feb 05, 2005 at 07:25:27 PM EST
    Having traveled the world (and can folks stop pretending that only Leftist travel worldwide). I can say that although most Europeans have a vision of "redneck" America formed particuarly fron CNN International, they are pleasantly surprized that we're not all shotgun toting yahoos. There are sad "yawns" that make up honest Euros as well as those that are the same state-side. Most Americans don't travel alot but it doesn't make them ignorant of world-wide events. Hey, I'm a well traveled guy so if being worldly is a part of being "well informed" than certain folks on this site must be really well traveled or perhaps just posuers. Either way the world is a really complicated place and anyone that thinks they can speak for everyone is shortsghted or more honestly is a fakir as well as arrogant.

    Re: Legal Experts: Ward Churchill's Job is Safe (none / 0) (#7)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Feb 06, 2005 at 07:15:22 AM EST
    "american capitalist, quasi-imperialist, consumerist, materialist culture is, at this point in time, far too thoughtless and destructive and waste oriented for any of us to find acceptable." Wow, Dadler. No need to bother generating even a single synapse of original thought when one can witlessly shuck and jive to the programmed party orthodoxy right on down the twelve-lane highway to oblivion. Now you can return to your couch, enjoy another evening in your decades-long commercial TV regimen, CNN, Newsweek, R. Crumb, Dylan, "Little Big Man", and all the rest of your dogma. By the way, evr hear of a guy named Hayek?

    Re: Legal Experts: Ward Churchill's Job is Safe (none / 0) (#8)
    by Dadler on Sun Feb 06, 2005 at 07:34:51 AM EST
    jim, all i am saying, and you seem completely incapable of facing this, is that simply because we've done a lot of good does not mean we also haven't done far too much that IS NOT GOOD. you seem to be unable to grasp that people and societies aren't black and white, that they aren't passive widgets that can be labeled good or bad. we are all angels and devils, sometimes at the same time (remember black soldiers shot by their own in wwII, or that racism and segregation were still the norm in most of america at that time???). how on god's green earth could you label something so obviously true (and f'ing non-partisan in its truth) as just b.s.? refute it with some kind of logic, some kind of self-critical passion, and not simply reactionary defensiveness.

    Re: Legal Experts: Ward Churchill's Job is Safe (none / 0) (#9)
    by Dadler on Sun Feb 06, 2005 at 07:43:02 AM EST
    doctor ace, go into any store, just for example. a glorious thing, stocked with goodies, but almost ALL of what is in there is useless packaging that will be tossed away without a thought as to the waste involved in its use-it-then-lose-it manufacture. for everything necessary we use, there are several utterly useless, wasteful, polluting and unnecessary things we toss away. with other people's lives abroad, too many times, in our geo-political dealings, we do a quite similar thing. sorry we disagree. keep waving that big foam finger and chanting "we're number 1!" i prefer another approach in dealing with reality.

    Re: Legal Experts: Ward Churchill's Job is Safe (none / 0) (#10)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Feb 06, 2005 at 07:49:06 AM EST
    If it's useless to you, Dadler, don't buy it. If you have a solution to the inherent problems of shipping goods, now's the time. But people are not poor because others are rich. It is not a zero-sum game. People are poor because their political leaders do not spend public money wisely, because there is no rule of law, independent judiciary, etc. The world does not need people pointing to others telling them how not to live their lives.

    Re: Legal Experts: Ward Churchill's Job is Safe (none / 0) (#11)
    by Dadler on Sun Feb 06, 2005 at 08:12:26 AM EST
    ace, denying that we have a huge footprint on the world, that we do not contribute to suffering all over the place -- while in other places doing plenty of good -- well, then we're pissing into the wind. i wasn't making any point regarding anyone else but US. bad leaders have hurt their people all over the world, i don't think any sane person would argue with you on that. trouble is, and this is my point, we have supported and continue to support certain bad leaders. that comes with consequences, whether we're big enough as a nation to look into the mirror or not. as for my packaging analogy, take it or leave it, it's the truth. you think it's a good thing to create mountains and mountains of inorganic garbage? don't you think we could do just a tad better at not squandering resources? you think oversized cars getting 15 mpg is a GOOD thing in this day and age? come on, bro, stop with the dadler whipping and flip on your brain. i'm asking. are those good?

    Re: Legal Experts: Ward Churchill's Job is Safe (none / 0) (#12)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Feb 06, 2005 at 08:27:21 AM EST
    If they weren't good, they wouldn't be there. I once had a conv. van that got 14 mpg, and that was rolling down the highway at 65 mph with the wind at its back. But it transported seven people and all their gear, not to mention camping gear, sports eq. musical instruments, food and drinks, etc. Isn't that green enough for ya? Like I said, if you have a solution to the inherent prob. of shipping goods, bring it on. But when people pay good money for things, they don't want them to arrive broken (you included, I figure).

    Re: Legal Experts: Ward Churchill's Job is Safe (none / 0) (#13)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Feb 06, 2005 at 09:57:39 AM EST
    clio - Not that it is any of your business, but to answer your snarky question, the answer is yes. A lot, as both a civilian businessman, as a "just knocking around" tourist and in the military. I have had a passport 37 years. My favorite country was Spain, with Italy a close second. The most beautiful place? Malta. My faorite color is blue, my favorite music genre is rock and classic C&W. My favorite mode of travel is by air, First Class. Now what is your point? That I am uneducated, unexperienced and so do not understand the finer points of the world? Wrong, elitist breath. dadler - I noted that we are not perfect. And, no, I know of no cases in which black soldiers were shot by white soldiers in WWII. Could it have happened as an isolated case? Yes. Can you provide a link to it? Was racism the norm in the 40's? To a large degree. Did things change? Yes. That is one of the things that make our country great. dadler, did you ever consider what would happen to the ME if someone discovered cold fusion, and suddenly we had a new source of energy, and oil was no longer needed? And why should I worry about "defending" baseless attacks? Why don't you provide some specific reasons why Churchill is defended for spouting and writing hate speech? BTW - Much of the "packaging" issue you complain about is done in China, Taiwan, Indonesia and other parts of the world. Have you considered organizing a demonstration in these countries? I am sure the Chinese will welcome you with open arms.

    Re: Legal Experts: Ward Churchill's Job is Safe (none / 0) (#14)
    by Dadler on Sun Feb 06, 2005 at 10:04:39 AM EST
    ace, your inherent problem can be solved by requiring that shipping materials be reused and not discarded. period. also, shipping materials are different than packaging. do you need a box for toothpaste to come in? to name one. can we not sell detergent like we sell gasoline? out of a spigot? we're not talking rocket science here. as for your "if they weren't good they wouldn't be there" analogy about cars, suv's, etc., how on earth to reply to such a generic and absolutist statement? they are there because oil was made cheap by our support for petroleum dictators in the middle east AND our refusal to accept the environmental damage caused by fossil feuls; and cars were made big to appeal to americans' instinct toward the oversized and wasteful. and overpriced. so...everything that exists in the marketplace is good? interesting. i hadn't thought you for such a candide and a utopian. peace, my fellow free american.

    Re: Legal Experts: Ward Churchill's Job is Safe (none / 0) (#15)
    by Dadler on Sun Feb 06, 2005 at 10:10:28 AM EST
    jim, my father was in the navy in world war II. when they would pull into a port to pick up black soldiers they would clear out the lowest deck of the ship -- hell, my dad called it -- so the blacks could be packed down there. he would go down and talk to them, and their stories, as told to me by my dad, are what informs my opinion. and this subject has been well written about. also, my dad was punished by his C.O. for dating a black woman while the ship was anchored in Hawaii. My man, these things happened, and they happened at the same time as we were fighting the Nazis in Europe. i'll say it again: difficult irony. as for packaging, you're right in a way, but if we said we just wanted trinkets without wasteful packaging, that's what we'd get. but lots of packaging and wasteful toss-it-without-a-thought crap is manufactured right here. consumerism is just what it sounds like. consume, consume, consume -- use, use, use -- waste, waste, waste... that's the system.

    Re: Legal Experts: Ward Churchill's Job is Safe (none / 0) (#16)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Feb 06, 2005 at 03:30:41 PM EST
    dadler - No one is denying that racism existed. But when you make specific claims, such as black soldiers being shot and killed by white solders, it is necessary that you provide some proof if you are to be taken seriously. I note you haven't done that.

    Re: Legal Experts: Ward Churchill's Job is Safe (none / 0) (#17)
    by Richard Aubrey on Sun Feb 06, 2005 at 04:24:18 PM EST
    Dadler, do you have the slightest idea of why packaging is used? Do the manufacturers like to waste money? Do the retailers like to waste space? Could there be a reason or something? One manufacturer of small, high-value items (which could include batteries) told me that the stiff, nearly impenetrable packaging that makes a pair of batteries take up as much space as a large paperback is to deter shoplifting. So, all you people who think stealing stuff from big stores is getting back at The Man might want to pony up a little responsibility for packaging. Not to break new ground here, but when a kid pays a bunch of tuition for a class which is to forward his education, is there not an implicit contract with the university that the class will actually do that? Like that's ever a consideration. This Churchill's cv is phony as the last US hostage video. Point is, he's got TL behind him. How about you all doing what the Brits call a whip-'round and rebate some of the tuition paid by any student unfortunate enough to be in his classes.

    Re: Legal Experts: Ward Churchill's Job is Safe (none / 0) (#18)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Feb 06, 2005 at 06:23:46 PM EST
    "The Right has a License to Write Anything: Ward Churchill and the Mad Dogs" is posted this weekend on Counterpunch by Alexander Cockburn [also cross-posted today on Colorado AIM blog with a different caption and linked in one of my comments in TL's earlier thread about John Gibson interview with Churchill's students here].

    Re: Legal Experts: Ward Churchill's Job is Safe (none / 0) (#19)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Feb 06, 2005 at 06:33:42 PM EST
    This piece posted on Counterpunch, "A Ward Churchill Kind of Day," by Kurt Nimmo, is interesting too.

    Re: Legal Experts: Ward Churchill's Job is Safe (none / 0) (#20)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Feb 06, 2005 at 07:46:40 PM EST
    Susan - I note you still haven't explained why this isn't hate speech. Just more YesBut's.

    Re: Legal Experts: Ward Churchill's Job is Safe (none / 0) (#21)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Feb 06, 2005 at 08:19:43 PM EST
    Understanding why Ward Churchill's essays do not constitute "hate speech" and why they do constitute "free speech" requires both reading his writings more fully in context (which very few posting here apparently have done, despite their disingenuous claims to the contrary) and also understanding what both "hate speech" and "free speech" (in legal terms) actually are. As anti-liberals and conservatives (and trolls) who post here frequently engage in offensive name-calling, in close-minded intolerance casting negative personal aspersions on others (approaching "hate speech") themselves, it is hard to give credence to any such thoughtless attacks on Ward Churchill, or anyone else (including me). It is not anyone's (including my) responsibility to reply to them (and certainly not in kind). Most certainly, I intend no such acquiescence (no tacit agreement, no "yes") at all in any of my comments or lack of them.

    Re: Legal Experts: Ward Churchill's Job is Safe (none / 0) (#22)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Feb 06, 2005 at 08:27:21 PM EST
    For those genuinely interested in finding more information about the work of Ward Churchill in order to enable them to contextualize it: as a starting point, one may check this link to the Department of Ethnic Studies at the University of Colorado web pages, featuring faculty web pages, including Ward Churchill's, with some of his publications listed, announcement of his recent resignation as department chairman, and his "press release" (Jan. 31, 2005) in the "news" section, including this disclaimer: "These are the views of Ward Churchill, not the University of Colorado." For more information about his previous work, one may click on "chair" (which, now that he has resigned, will likely be updated) and "faculty." His credentials include a B.A. and an M.A. degree in the field of Communication. Also, his various publishers and Alternative Radio list his books and interviews with him that are available from their sites.

    Re: Legal Experts: Ward Churchill's Job is Safe (none / 0) (#23)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Feb 06, 2005 at 08:32:52 PM EST
    A start on learning more about differences between "hate speech" and "free speech."

    Re: Legal Experts: Ward Churchill's Job is Safe (none / 0) (#24)
    by glanton on Sun Feb 06, 2005 at 08:33:49 PM EST
    Susan, Thanks for the links and the context. Context. Now there's a word this lynch mob knows nothing about.

    Re: Legal Experts: Ward Churchill's Job is Safe (none / 0) (#25)
    by Richard Aubrey on Sun Feb 06, 2005 at 08:37:08 PM EST
    Actually, in practice, "hate speech" is whatever anybody can complain offends him. On campus, it's actionable. Legal definitions are nice and all, but you should recall that actually requiring they be used would put you at a severe disadvantage. Careful what you ask for.

    Re: Legal Experts: Ward Churchill's Job is Safe (none / 0) (#26)
    by Richard Aubrey on Sun Feb 06, 2005 at 08:39:32 PM EST
    Anybody going to get on the bandwagon defending Hoppe? You know. He's the guy who broke out economic long-term planning by demographics, suggesting that, among others, gays as a group did less than other groups. Got himself in a potload of trouble. Some of his students are doing the fake offended thing. You all ought to split up some of this fake outrage over Churchill and use some of it for Hoppe. That way we'd know you had an actual principle in mind. Cough.

    Re: Legal Experts: Ward Churchill's Job is Safe (none / 0) (#27)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Feb 06, 2005 at 08:44:47 PM EST
    Along with the multifarious civil and human rights links already provided by TalkLeft and CrimeLynx: Questia's counterpart (to "hate speech") resources on free speech.

    Re: Legal Experts: Ward Churchill's Job is Safe (none / 0) (#28)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Feb 07, 2005 at 08:43:44 AM EST
    SHM, I found Nimmo "interesting" to the degree which he exudes contempt for ordinary Americans (and the vehicles they drive) while providing no info why the prof he mentioned is in solitary confinement. Altogether not informative.

    Re: Legal Experts: Ward Churchill's Job is Safe (none / 0) (#29)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Feb 07, 2005 at 09:52:46 AM EST
    glanton - Did you read my comment at the top of TL this morning? Now that is context. And that is quotations. Defend those.

    Re: Legal Experts: Ward Churchill's Job is Safe (none / 0) (#30)
    by nick on Mon Feb 07, 2005 at 07:18:15 PM EST
    typical start a false rumor leave it in then correct it

    Re: Legal Experts: Ward Churchill's Job is Safe (none / 0) (#31)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Feb 09, 2005 at 01:58:33 PM EST
    I am Native American and he should be fired FOR LYING ON HIS RESUME to get a job that should've been set aside for a qualified American Indian. Churchill is a cultural identity thief. Stealing our identity for his own ego and to enrich himself. Both of the largest Native newspapers have denounced him for being a fraud and a phony. Even AIM International has denounced this fake. He got that job in the 80s. Recieved tenure in 1991, but only went looking for a tribe after that. He was putting the cart befor the horse. If he lied to steal that job from a qualified Native American then he should be fired for falsyfing a job application. His so-called Indian ancestor was actually an INDIAN KILLER. http://www.insidedenver.com/drmn/local/article/0,1299,DRMN_15_3525487,00.html

    Re: Legal Experts: Ward Churchill's Job is Safe (none / 0) (#32)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Feb 09, 2005 at 02:25:02 PM EST
    To be fair, from your link, his ancester had his first wife (white) and several of their 8 children killed and scalped by a group of indians. Apparently Churchill's ancestry is traced to one of the white children who survived the attack. He then remarried to an indian and had another 7 children with her. He apparently did participate in a Revolutionary War battle against a group of indians in which both indians and whites were killed. Now, if your ancestors had participated in that same battle, I guess you would brand your ancestors as WHITE KILLERS? Personally, I think the guy's a total lying schmuck and should be canned, but why play the race card?

    Re: Legal Experts: Ward Churchill's Job is Safe (none / 0) (#33)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Thu Feb 10, 2005 at 07:17:42 AM EST
    Susan posted a couple of days ago: "His credentials include a B.A. and an M.A. degree in the field of Communication." Correct me if I am wrong, but his "degrees" come from Sangamon University before it was taken over by the University of Illinois-Springfield. Sangamon was an "experimental" college in which there were no evalutions, no Deans, etc. As far as I'm concerned, his "degrees" aren't worth the recycled paper they are printed on.

    Legal Experts: Ward Churchill's Job is Safe | 32 comments (32 topical)