Students, Faculty Target Professor for Writing Honest History of Black Lives Matter
00:05This is the Daily Signal podcast for Wednesday, July 1st. I'm Kate Trinco.And I'm Virginia Allen. The attempted silencing continues of those who oppose some of the radicalfar-left agenda of the Black Lives Matter Coalition. Today, we talk with Bill Jacobson,founder and publisher of legal insurrection and a law professor at Cornell Universityabout students and faculty at Cornell who are publicly shaming him and trying to get otherstudents to boycott his class for his recent blog posts discussing the true history and platformof the Black Lives Matter Coalition. And don't forget, if you're enjoying this podcast, pleasebe sure to leave a review or a five-star rating on Apple Podcasts, and please encourage others to
00:51subscribe. Now on to our top news. Dr. Anthony Fauci delivered a stern warning to Americaduring a congressional hearing Tuesday, saying the country needed to change its approach to COVID-19.Fauci, an advisor to President Trump on coronavirus and director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases,said that the nation could reach 100,000 cases a day, up from 40,000 cases a day that we face currently.We're going in the wrong direction if you look at the curves of the new cases, said Fauci.according to the Hill. We need to do something about that, and we need to do it very quickly.The Supreme Court issued a win for students and families on Tuesday. The court ruled five to fourin the case Espinoza v. Montana Department of Revenue, which will now require states who offer
01:53scholarships or financial aid to families for private education to also be required to offerthat same funding to families who wish to send their children to a religious school.Chief Justice John Roberts wrote the majority opinion for the case and said,A state need not subsidize private education, but once a state decides to do so, it cannotdisqualify some private schools simply because they are religious.Heritage Foundation's Lindsay Burke and Emily Gow co-authored a daily signal piece in response to the ruling in which they wrote,Today's decision in Espinoza removed the largest state constitutional obstacle,by holding that Blaine amendments cannot be used to deny choice to parents.
02:39States can no longer, under the federal constitution,prevent parents from choosing religious schools if they are participating in a school choice program.And they concluded, the court made it clear that policymakers across the countrynow have the power to an act robust school choice programs.They should do just that.Well, Americans hoping to go to Europe this summer may need to rethink their plans.The European Union has announced which countries can now visit Europe amid fear of the COVID-19 pandemic,and the U.S. isn't on it.
03:14Countries that are approved to have their people visit, per NPR, include Australia, Canada, Japan, South Korea,and if they allow Europeans to visit, China.Now stay tuned for my conversation with Professor Bill Jacobson about why students and faculty at Cornell Universitywant him silenced for his writings on the Black Lives Matter Coalition.Are you proud to be an American?We're at such a critical moment in our nation's history,and it's more important than ever that we remind one anotherwhy we are blessed and truly proud to call ourselves Americans.
03:57The Heritage Foundation and Heritage Action for Americahave launched the hashtag proud American campaign.From now through July 4th,we're asking all our listeners to use that.hashtag, proud American, on social media and share why you are proud to live in the greatestnation in the world.I am joined by William Jacobson, a Cornell Law professor and the founder and publisherof legal insurrection.
04:25Professor Jacobson, thanks so much for being here.Thank you for having me.You wrote a couple of blog posts explaining the history of the Black Lives Matter organization.The post addressed issues that you see with the organization and with its founders.And for this, students at Cornell and even faculty are trying to get students to boycott your classes.What did you write in your posts that is now appearing to be so offensive to these students and faculty?Well, I've been at Cornell now for 12 years.And for most of that time, it was a fairly open environment.
05:02While it was certainly very liberal, and I was the lone conservative on the faculty, nothing like I've experienced now.So one of the things that I followed at the website over the years was the formation of the Black Lives Matter movement, particularly the Ferguson riots and the Michael Brown shooting.So recently I was watching some of the protests and the riots and the looting.And one of the things I saw is people marching around with their hands raised in the air saying, don't shoot.And I recognize that right away as one of the foundational slogans of the Black Lives Matter movement arising.from the Michael Brown case.Michael Brown was shot by a policeman in Ferguson, Missouri,and I think it was either 2014 or 2013,
05:48and the narrative was createdthat he was shot with his hands in the air saying,don't shoot.The Black Lives Matter seized on thatto gain national attention around the country.I knew that to be falsebecause the Justice Department owner Obamahad investigated it and found out that never happened,
06:07that Michael Brown was not the victimof police brutality. He was a perpetrator who punched a policeman in the face and tried to stealhis weapon, was shot once, made a second run at the policeman, was shot again, and that's whatkilled him. So I recognized recently that this whole narrative of vicious police shooting a blackman with his hands raised was false, and I wrote about that. And it's not the first time I've writtenabout it. I've written about it multiple times since 2014.So that's post number one that set people off. The complaint about that post is nobodycontested the facts that I presented or the Justice Department findings. They said it was very
06:51insensitive of me at this time of turmoil to be rioting about that. The second thing that set peopleoff was I wrote a post harshly critical of the looting and the rioting, and I talked about how thiswas a reflection of the Marxist foundations of the Black Lives Matter movement, which is true.It's well documented that the original founders, in fact, there's a video circulating now,bragged about how they had a Marxist agenda and were trained Marxist activists in their mindset.Their agenda has been to tear down the country, has been not to build up the country,and has not been to heal racial relations, it's been to exploit racial tensions.And so I wrote about that.
07:41I also called on the federal government to get involved and to identify and prosecute the people who helped coordinate the violence.And I used that term specifically, helped coordinate the violence.So that was post number two.Those two set people off for a variety of reasons.Why now?why not some other time in the past. And so what it initially started with was alumni letter writingand petition campaign to get me fired. Then a faculty letter signed by 21 of my colleagues denouncing me.Then a statement from the dean denouncing me. And then multiple student groups announcing a boycott
08:27of my course. And that's where we are today. And I can get into more detail if you want.So essentially what you're saying is you're being publicly shamed, your classes are being boycotted,not because you made in factual statements, but because the timing wasn't sensitive.Well, in part, what they would say, they've never contested the facts of what I said.They've said, I too broadly painted a negative brush of the movement.That while maybe the founders were Marxists, maybe some of the other people, I shouldn't have cast dispersions on these pieces.protestors. But I think anybody fairly reading what I wrote doesn't cast aspersions on peoplewho were peacefully protesting. It definitely cast dispersions on people breaking store windows,
09:13looting stores, beating people up, tearing down statues, and all of the other things. So it was,I would call it a hypersensitivity to a dissenting voice on campus. So, you know, I think one of thethings that really appears to be happening is that we're seeing a blurring of the lines between thestatement, Black Lives Matter, and the organization, Black Lives Matter. Can you just speak to thatdifference between just that statement saying Black Lives Matter and then the organization?You're right. There are two different aspects, and it actually was a fairly brilliant move by the organizersseveral years ago to essentially establish a hashtag, a Twitter hashtag, a social mediahashtag called Black Lives Matter, but also to establish their own organization.
10:05And the line does blur.So if you ask people, do you think Black Lives Matter?The answer is going to be for 99% of the population, including me.Yes, of course.But that is exploited.Those good feelings of goodwill are.exploited by a movement which does not have goodwill in its heart, the organized movement,by people who have used this as a manipulative device. So it's very interesting how they have
10:35developed a feel-good hashtag, but behind it is a fairly organized structure, and there aremultiple structures that tend to exploit things. So Cornell's Black Lost YouStudents Association responded to your blog posts by making a number of false accusations about you.And in response to that, you offered to sit down and have a debate with them, with a person oftheir choosing. And to this offer, they responded in an email to the Cornell Law community saying,quote, faculty members who challenge students to debate them on the motives of those fighting to preserveblack life are clearly more interested in amplifying their own agendas than engaging in thoughtfuland reflective discourse.
11:25I find their response really interestingbecause you were actually asking themto have just that, a thoughtful and reflective discourse.And they said, no.What does this response tell youabout the motives of studentswho are actively opposing you?Well, what happened is when I went public with this
11:43on my website, among the things I saidis that I would be happy to have a public debateat the law school in the fallwhen classes resume.with a representative of the Black Law Students Associationand a faculty member of their choosing.So it wouldn't be me against a student,which might have some perception of unfairness,
12:04it would be me essentially against two people,and we could talk this through.We could talk it out.I asked the law school to sponsor it.I asked it to be live-streamed,and we could talk through these issues.So actually, what I proposed was a debate,an open debate, a fair debate,
12:21and where people could air the issue.but it's very clear to me that neither they nor the other student groups nor the administrationhave any interest in that because there is a uniformity of acceptable viewpoint on campus.And it was announced by the dean in a letter condemning me for my writings.It has been announced not with regard to me, but more generally by the Cornell Universityadministration, that you are on board with the agenda of the Black Lives Matter movement,or you have no place.And that is really the problem here
12:58is that they do not want a debate about the issues.I would love to debate why I believe the movement is extremely destructive,that it is the opposite of everything we have been taught about racial healing,about valuing the worth of each person based on their characterand their merits, not their skin color,that this obsession,with seeing everything that happens in the world through a racial lens is the opposite of what is in everyone's best interest.So I would love to have that debate, not just on the history of the Black Lives Matter organized movement, but the bigger issue.
13:40But that's not a debate.To them, and I want to say them, I mean the community, the organized community, including administrators, faculty and most student groups,that's not up for debate.And it should be because I believe when we look back on this moment in history,whether it's six months from now, six years or 60 years from now,we are going to realize how much damage this movement,this racialized movement did to the country,that it did nothing to advance the cause of racial justice.
14:17It just served to tear the nation apart.And I'd love to have that debate, but that's not a debate they want to have.Are there students that are coming to you and saying, actually, Professor Jacobson, I agree with you, or maybe even who are saying, you know, I don't agree, but I still respect your choice to speak out and say these things and write these things?Yeah.What I have received is really an outpouring of support from students.many students have written to me, assuring me, that I have a lot of support at the law schoolamong students, but that it's a very quiet support, that people are afraid to speak up.And I've received that message as many different ways.
15:07So that's one of the real tragedies of this.One thing I've learned is this is not primarily about me.I mean, I have job security.I have academic freedom as part of my job.The threat to my job is, I'm not going to say it's non-existent,but it's not the most substantial thing.What me being targeted has done is it has intimidated students.It has sent a message to students that on this issue,
15:38there can be no dissent.And if you do dissent, you run the risk of being treatedthe way Professor Jacobson is being treated.and that's the opposite of what should be happening at the law school.The boycott of my classes has also put students in a difficult position because there aremany students who want to take my course.My course has nothing to do with politics, has nothing to do with race.It's regarding investment disputes and how to handle investment disputes.
16:07And it's a small class, but we typically will get three to five, four to five peopleapplying for each available spot.So there's a strong interest in the course.But now that a dozen or so student groups have announced not just that they are boycotting the course,but that they're calling on others to do so, it puts students in a very difficult positionbecause now taking my course could be deemed a political act,that it would be deemed an act against the Black Lives Matter movement if they were to pursue the education they desire,which is a completely non-political education.
16:44So I think you add it all up. You add up the quiet student support, the fear of speaking up, the political litmus test for taking a course. And I think it has been extraordinarily destructive to the atmosphere at the law school. And that's what students have conveyed to me.Wow. Wow. I think that's the perfect word to describe it destructive. And I feel like at the end of the day, that for me is what is so frustrating as a recent,college grad, only graduated about four years ago, is, you know, I think of university as being a placeof mixed ideas. You know, people are allowed to have their own opinions and you go thereto be presented with different views and to kind of wrestle with thoughts and ideas and have thosechallenging conversations. But now it's almost like that whole notion is sort of being likeflesh down the toilet. Where, where has that gone, that idea that it's okay for us to have differingperspectives and we can actually engage in a civil debate? There's a lot of verbiage given towards
17:55that idea at the Cornell campus. If you read the statements by the president of the university,it's a very flowery language about open environment and open in-course and exchange of ideas.And I think you see the same thing at the law school.But when it comes to the actual test, when it comes to the real-life scenario of the most hot-buttonissue facing the country right now, they don't apply that to that issue.Yes, I could probably rattle off a dozen or two dozen issues where you can have a debate,but on the single most important one, you can't.And so I think that that's another example of how destructive it has become.
18:37this is not something that I've seen at Cornell previously.If anybody's ever heard me speak before, and they're all recorded,I constantly say that Cornell, relative to a lot of other schools,certainly relative to a lot of other Ivy League schools,is a relatively moderate place.And I always would point out how there have been repeated attempts over the yearsto get me fired, to harass me, to threaten people about me.But it's always come from off campus, never inside.
19:07the campus. This is the first time it's come inside the campus. This is the first time I've seensuch a complete shutdown on any dissent with regard to an important issue. So I think thatin many regards, Cornell does permit open inquiry, but not on this one. Are any of the other facultystaff at Cornell, who, you know, you being one of the only conservative professors, openly conservative,on the campus, have any of your liberal colleagues been scrutinized for statements that they made in thepast? No, and that's, of course, the complete double standard here. The denunciation of me by thedean of the law school as the dean on behalf of the institution, which is extraordinary. I'm not sureif it's ever been done in the history of Cornell Law School. We have on campus and at the law school
20:02some faculty who say things that I consider highly offensive. We have a fact that. We have a fact thatfaculty member who I happen to like a lot, who was a supporter of Occupy Wall Street. Nobody getsthat scrutiny. Nobody who approaches things from left of center and nobody who approaches thingsfrom far left of center gets the type of scrutiny and the type of administrative reaction that I havereceived, which I think tells you something that when push came to shove, all of this dialogueabout maintaining a neutral forum for the debate of ideas went right out the window,that it came right down to politics and pressure.I have to assume that the dean was receiving pressure from a lot of people
20:46because the statement that he issued should have been one sentence,maybe two sentences, which is, while I may personally disagree with Professor Jacobson,he has the academic freedom to express his own views,and we will not take any disciplinary action.period. Instead of spending multiple paragraphs lashing out at me and announcing that my writings arecontrary to the values of the school, something that was announced without giving me any chanceto be heard on it, any chance to contest that. It was simply announced as a proclamation.So I think that it has been the sort of thing where there's a complete double standard that
21:28they defend the right of people on the far left.to make statements and they never engaged in that sort of critiquing in public shaming that I've been put through.Are you concerned that you might be fired?I don't, I mean, they've announced they're not.Okay.So if they do, we'll see.But I'm not, that's not my primary concern right now.I think if I were in a different position that perhaps, I mean, I don't have tenure,
21:58but I have something that's kind of the equivalent of tenure.and so I do have job protection, and they've announced they're going to honor that.Things could change.I certainly can't say I won't be fired to an absolute certainty,but they have announced that that's not going to happen.But we'll see.But that's not my primary concern.My primary concern is that there was an attempt made to damage my reputation.
22:23There was very destructive actions taken with regard to student course choicesand to the open intellectual environment at the law school, and those will be much more lasting.Long after I'm gone, I think there will be ramifications from the targeting of me that has taken place.From the time that you started teaching at Cornell to now, do you remember a shift or kind of when things started to change,and we entered into this much more politically correct space where, you know, freedom of speech feltmuch more limited.Well, I don't want, with regard to what's going on now, I think it's a mistake to put it throughthe lens of political correctness. Political correctness is what we've seen on campuses forever,
23:14or at least for decades. This is way beyond political correctness. This is a function of what I wouldcall campus cancel culture that has been growing over the years. I can't put a year on it,but I think that in the last three to five years, there has been a growing intolerance on campuses.We see that around the country. A lot of speakers being shouted down, driven off of campus,students being harassed because they express a non-liberal, non-leftist point of view.So it's been building, but at Cornell, I haven't seen it. I haven't seen it.building in a very bad way. It's my experience. Something changed the last couple of months.I mean, this is, to me, a unique moment in time where you have a confluence of factors which are coming together
24:08to create an extraordinarily hostile environment for open inquiry when it comes to the Black Lives Matter movement,the organized movement and an agenda. So I think it would be a mistake.to compare this to a lot of the other things that have happened, although the other things didcreate an atmosphere where intolerance was allowed to foster. So how do you plan to proceed?Are you going to keep writing and sharing your conservative views? Yes, and I'm going to go on anyone'spodcast who will take me, any TV show that will take me, any radio show, I'm going to continuewriting, I think that for me to shrink away from this challenge would be a huge mistake. It'ssomething I would personally regret forever. And I think it would be a mistake for the students,
24:58because I've not only received many student emails, I've received emails in the hundreds,the multiple hundreds from around the country, because I did have some major media appearancesof people who are thankful that there is somebody who is able to speak out, because most peopleare afraid of losing their job, with good reason. We've seen that across the country that anyone whomakes the slightest negative statement about the Black Lives Matter movement, anyone who questionsrioting and looting is subject to possibly losing their job. And so I think this is a momentin time where we need more people to be able to stand up, but I recognize most people can't.I mean, I can't expect a law student 24, 25 years old, just about to embark on their career.
25:49They know how devastating it would be if there were the sort of things said about them that are being said about me.I mean, it would damage their career prospects.It would damage their job prospects to have that stuff on Google searches.So I understand why they can't, why they can only speak to me quietly and send me private messages.So I do feel a bit of an obligation to continue to speak out for them because there's nobody else to do it at this point in time, certainly not at Cornell Law School.Yeah. Well, thank you for continuing to speak out. And if you would, just tell our listeners a little bit about legal insurrection, what they can find there, why they should follow it and read what you write.Yes, legal insurrection. I started the website in October 2008, which is after I was hired at Cornell.So I don't think they would have hired me if I had the website at the time.
26:44In fact, I'm quite certain they would not have.But it started off as a solo blog by me for a couple of years on Google Blogger,and it's developed into a bigger thing over time.And now we have a staff of people.We have writers.We have researchers and investigators.We are also a 501C3 at this point.And so we tried to grab onto issues, investigate them, write about them,
27:09push them out into the media. And for whatever the reason, I think maybe because of my positionin my real job, which is at Cornell Law School, I seem to be a lightning rod for certaincontroversies. I've had controversies where I went to colleges to talk about free speech and to talkabout why even hate speech or what we call hate speech is constitutionally protected. And thathas set people off. So, you know, we try to grab onto issues related to free speech, campus, free speech, free expression, capitalism,those sort of things, and push them out there.And for whatever the reason, we get some pushback sometimes.
27:53Well, we are certainly thankful for the work that you're doing.Professor Jacobson, thank you so much for coming on the show today.Great. Thank you for having me.And that'll do it for today's episode.Thanks for listening to the Daily Signal podcast.We appreciate your patience as we record remotely.during these weeks.Please be sure to subscribe on Apple Podcasts, Google Play, or Spotify,
28:15and please leave us a review or a rating on Apple Podcasts to give us your feedback.Stay healthy, and we'll be back with you tomorrow.The Daily Signal podcast is brought to you by more than half a million members of the Heritage Foundation.It is executive produced by Kate Trinko and Rachel Del Judas,sound design by Lauren Evans, Mark Geinney, and John Pop.For more information, visit DailySignal.com.
There aren't comments yet for this episode. Click any sentence in the transcript to leave one.