[ad_1]
Frank defended her comments, saying they were not directed at all Israeli students, but specifically at students who had served in the military and harassed Palestinian students and other students on campus. She believes her comments were taken out of context and used as a pretext to retaliate against her for her pro-Palestinian activities.
Despite the ongoing investigation and potential threats to her job, Frank remains steadfast in her convictions and continues to speak out for Palestinian student rights on campus, arguing that universities should not stifle free speech and political activism but rather protect and uphold these rights for all students.
As the investigation continues, Frank’s future at Columbia is uncertain. However, she remains steadfast in her principles and will continue to fight for justice and equality for all students, regardless of their background or beliefs.
A spokesperson wrote, “We do not comment on pending investigations.”
The university did send a copy of the Office of Equal Opportunity and Affirmative Action policy, which includes termination as one of the possible sanctions for alleged discrimination and harassment. Frank said her attorney told her there was a 50-50 chance she would be fired.
While those spokespeople may have remained silent about the investigation, university presidents have spoken out about it on the national stage. Appearing on MSNBC later in April, Frank called Shafik’s comments a “shocking moment” and said Shafik “knows I didn’t say those things. I’ve talked to her about it. What Rep. Stefanik said is a complete lie and fabrication.”
Frank insisted that Stefanik misquoted her. A spokesman for Stefanik said the “congresswoman was paraphrasing the article in the conservative Washington Free Beacon,” which in turn said she was paraphrasing the student lawsuit against anti-Semitism.
Frank went on MSNBC, saying, “I’ve talked to certain people who came to campus directly from military service about how we have issues on campus and the transition from the mindset that it takes to be a soldier to the mindset that it takes to be a student — (those) are different mindsets and that transition can be difficult.” She told Inside Higher Ed that her comments on MSNBC are now also part of the investigation.
Frank said he used Shafik’s comments and pressure from within Columbia and the public to defend himself. “The president of the university has already prejudged me in the congressional record,” Frank said.
Frank also argued that the school had a “litigious motive” to discipline her harshly because Jewish students had accused the university in a lawsuit of tolerating an environment hostile to them by failing to adequately enforce its disciplinary code.
According to Frank, she and her attorney got university employees to resign as investigators, and now an outside law firm, Sher Tremonte, is conducting the investigation. “On June 13, I was interrogated for several hours,” Frank said. “It was clear that the lead investigator had made a decision.”
It’s unclear what full process Franke will pursue and what protections are available to prevent her firing. This is an investigation by the Office of Equal Opportunity and Affirmative Action, but university policy also states that she has the right to a hearing sponsored by the Faculty Affairs Committee unless she is exempted. Franke said he hasn’t given up yet.
Greg Scholtz, a senior official in the AAUP’s Division of Academic Freedom, Tenure and Governance, said that if the Columbia administration wants to take punitive action, it should “present specific charges to the elected faculty hearing body and ask them to prove that Professor Frank’s words or actions at that hearing justify the sanction — keeping in mind that any serious sanction must be directly and substantially related to her actual performance as a professor or researcher.” Scholtz said that “if she is summarily terminated, she will certainly come to the attention of the AAUP.”
Zach Greenberg, a First Amendment attorney with the free speech group Foundation for Individual Liberty and Expression, said Frank’s controversial statement “seems to me to be a political statement” and “absent further evidence, it would still be protected under Columbia’s free speech policy.”
Frank said if a tenured professor can be fired for her speech, she worries about what will happen to those who are less protected, especially in a possible second Trump administration. “If they can go after me for protecting students, what’s next?” Frank said. “Speech about abortion, criticism of Trump, climate change?”
[ad_2]
Source link
