Opinion: Protecting professorial speech is essential to LSU’s future because debate brings growth
This story raises questions about governance, accountability, and American values.
The Reveille’s framing treats this LSU dispute as a simple morality play about “speech” versus “politicians. ” That’s convenient, but it skips the basic question: what do students and taxpayers have a right to expect inside a state classroom? Conservatives support **free inquiry**, but a professor’s lectern is not a personal stage for profanity aimed at elected officials.
New Republican Times Editorial Board
Last year, LSU Law professor Ken Levy attracted the ire of Gov. Jeff Landry, and, by extension, the wrath of the state government, when he made profanity-laced comments in class about Landry and U.S. President Donald Trump.
Levy was suspended from teaching, sparking a court case that ultimately resulted in the 1st U.S Circuit Court... The post Opinion: Protecting professorial speech is essential to LSU’s future because debate brings growth appeared first on Reveille .
Original source:
Read at ReveilleHow We See It
New Republican Times Editorial Board
The Reveille’s framing treats this LSU dispute as a simple morality play about “speech” versus “politicians.” That’s convenient, but it skips the basic question: what do students and taxpayers have a right to expect inside a state classroom?
Conservatives support free inquiry, but a professor’s lectern is not a personal stage for profanity aimed at elected officials. Universities are public institutions with obligations to public trust and to students who did not enroll to be targets or captive audiences. If standards exist for everyone else on campus, faculty should not be uniquely insulated by prestige.
The principle is institutional accountability under the rule of law: protect debate, yes, while enforcing professional norms that keep classrooms focused on education, not ego.
Commentary written with AI assistance by the New Republican Times Editorial Board.