Academic Freedom and Debate About Race-Based Appointments, Hiring, Admissions, Etc.

It is currently in heated discussion in the United States about race-based or race-influenced decisions in matters such as judicial appointment, recruitment, and university admissions. (See, e.g. here and here). Academic freedom’s function is to promote debate and allow students to talk about various topics without worrying about losing their jobs.

Academic freedom principles can often be used to resolve concrete issues about the identity of someone. Has said. Their purpose is, however, to let people feel liberated Future statements. So with an eye to that, let me pose a question to people who think Georgetown can rightly fire or otherwise discipline Ilya Shapiro, consistently with its stated academic freedom principles, for his tweet about race-based appointments—or who are considering the possibility that Georgetown can rightly do that:

Do you believe academic freedom is still protected in the face of criticisms based on race?

You can choose any one of the following and answer in comments, or tweet your explanations:

  1. However, academic freedom does not protect against criticisms of race-based admissions and hiring decisions (as long as these decisions are favorable to one or other racial group).
  2. Academic freedom protects such criticism—but only if Georgetown administrators, who likely disagree with the criticism, nonetheless think the criticism is well-reasoned, thoughtful, consistent, etc. Would you rather apply the criterion for all viewpoints on any subject or to only criticism of race-based decisionmaking?
  3. Academic freedom protects such criticism—unless it leads to enough controversy and condemnation among various groups that the Georgetown administration finds especially important. Again, do you want to apply the criterion for all viewpoints on all subjects or just to critics of race-based decisionsmaking?
  4. Academic freedom protects such criticism—except for arguments that such race-based decisionmaking promotes the less qualified over the more qualified. The opponents of race-based decisionsmaking cannot defend their positions by making such arguments.
  5. Academic freedom protects such criticism, including a hypothetical statement such as “Objectively best pick for Biden is Sri Srinivasan, who is solid prog & v smart…. We’ll just have to get rid of him because he’s not in the most recent intersectionality hierarchy. [less-qualified]Black woman Writing “we will get lesser black women” instead of “we’ll get less qualified black woman” should result in a firing offense.
  6. Another, please let us know what rule Georgetown should issue on these matters.