Professor Sues Purdue for Violation of his Free Speech Rights on Islam

Pages: 1 2

Eisenstein: Well, these retaliation charges and guilty findings are based on two separate incidents.  Basically, professors Lerner and Joyce both (tried to) initiate conversations with me (Lerner by email and Joyce in person).  In both instances, I attempted to convey that I was not interested in conversations with them that did not involve official University business.  My exchange with Lerner happened over my personal email — that is, I responded to an email he sent to my non-University account.

So, again, we have the University investigating my speech — speech on my personal email account and associated with one of my personal associations — the Jewish Federation of Northwest Indiana.  My exchange with Joyce was in person and in the aftermath of that exchange, she then falsely accused me of saying mean-spirited comments.  As FIRE pointed out in a second letter to the University, all of the alleged speech is protected by the First Amendment.

FP: Do you anticipate that after all of this the University will change its behavior?

Eisenstein: I am convinced that nothing, at this point, will get the University to change its behavior.  In fact, at this very moment, the University is conducting yet another investigation of my free speech.  This time the University is investigating whether or not my blog has violated the University’s anti-harassment/discrimination policies.  The specific blog in question can be viewed here.  It is essentially accusing me of retaliation for publishing emails they provided to me through a FOIA request.  But, essentially, the University is continuing to violate my First Amendment rights even up to today.  The question of why it would do this remains the University’s commitment to Muslim legal definitions, especially when it comes to “offending” Islam.  As recently as last week, Miriam Joyce, a professor who filed a complaint against me is quoted as saying that she believes in free-speech but only if it does not offend our Saudi students. This is the one of the same professors who voted against my department supporting a presentation by Ms. Peggy Shapiro from StandWithUs on the Nazi roots of contemporary anti-Semitism, which was covered here on Frontpage.

FP: Why do you think the University engages in this kind of behavior?

Eisenstein: I think that the University behaves this badly for a number of reasons.  First, the university administrators (and others at the university) never have to pay the legal bills for their illegal behavior.  If the administrators were held personally accountable for the financial troubles they inflict upon the tax payers (I am at a state funded university), I think we would see a wholesale change in behavior.  Second, as an individual, it is expensive to legally defend yourself against an institution that gets to feed off public funds.  And, points one and two are related, as I think the University and its administration relies on most professors (and students) not having the resources to legally pursue their cause.  I would like to see University administrators, and other professors, have to pay out of their own pocket for patently violating the First Amendment.

FP: How might you advise others to confront similar situations?

Eisenstein: There are two things I would say: 1) get a lawyer right from the start.  And 2) contact FIRE.

FP: Tell us a bit about the lawsuit you have filed. What might it achieve? What do you hope it will achieve?

Eisenstein: The lawsuit deals with three issues: administrative violations by the University, the collusion of faculty with Chancellor Keon of PUC to subvert my freedom of speech, and outrageous violations to my right to privacy.  For the first issue, the University, as I referenced before, did not follow its own procedures in how it chose to pursue the original 9 harassment/discrimination complaints against me.  Most importantly for me, though, is that the University has found me “guilty” of two instances of retaliation that do not meet any legal standard for retaliation. So I want to have those administrative decisions reversed and the sanctions imposed on me reversed.

I also want the University to protect my — and others’ — right to privacy.  The University administration released private documents from my personnel file to other faculty members who then made these documents public. This is a plain violation of the law and I want the University to have to take steps to correct this mistake and to ensure it will not ever happen again.  Really, this was extreme and outrageous.

Finally, the collusion of the faculty with the administration to deny me my civil rights is as outrageous a situation as one can imagine.  The University not only allowed the abuse of its legitimate process dealing with real harassment and discrimination, it encouraged and participated in the abuse.  These practices need to stop.  The University has policies that say the right thing — their policies state that speech protected by the First Amendment will not be investigated — but the University never adhered, nor adheres, to that policy.  What I want is for the University to never again investigate someone’s free speech, ever.  As the Supreme Court has indicated, if free-speech is chilled at a university it cannot continue to be an institution of higher learning.

FP: Professor Maurice Eisenstein, best of luck to you in your battle for free speech at Purdue and thank you for joining Frontpage Interview.

Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: Click here.  

Pages: 1 2

  • Chezwick

    The outcome of Eisenstein's lawsuit is very important in terms of precedent. I would implore him not to agree to a settlement offer that requires him to remain mum regarding its terms. PUC should be made to publicly acknowledge its transgressions and express contrition…the kind of self-criticism "exercise" that the Left traditionally imposes on its victims.

    • Jules

      "These people" come to the U.S.A. where Freedom of Speech is protected by The Constitution and then protest against whatever speech they decree is not "free." There are many universities in other countries (e.g.,Islamic) that do not permit "insulting" the prophet. Why not go there?

      "They" come to our singular nation to take and take and take… our democracy, our Western Freedoms, and to exploit our institutions of higher education, then protest against what made it great.

      "They" come here to take our Constitution and Bill of Rights and replace it with their anti-Western, archaic, totalitarian, supremacist ideology. What makes them think they can come here to be educated, but then intimidate and re-educate us? What makes them think we will take THEIR INSULTS sitting down? Think again.

      Professor Maurice Eisenstein: May The Force Be With YOU.


    The greatest insult to Islam are the islamofascist terrorists who are named some variant of the name mohammed.

    That the formerly respected religion of Islam has been dragged into the gutter by Muslims is Islams greatest shame.

  • Anthony

    “Formerly respected religion of Islam”? Are you kidding?

    Don’t base your romantic notions about the worlds most deadly, repressive, intolerant and longest lived totalitarian system of controlling societies on the Hollywood film “Kingdom of Heaven”.

    You sound stupid.

  • Anthony

    Professor Eisenstein is a brave man, an example of someone who is standing up against the evil, the Left has unleashed upon our country.

    Think of this completely malicious enterprise as an example of the Left’s complete participation in the empowerment of intolerance and the institutionalization of sharia style, Islamic blasphemy law into their policy.

    Why? Because there is an evil nexus as Horowitz reveals time and again, between the Left and the Moslems. This relationship is for the moment symbiotic , but in time, will result as it does everywhere Moslems are imported, into a death struggle with Islam, as history shows, reigning supreme.

    Professor Eisenstein knows well that the idea of ” Moderate Moslems” is a comforting thought in theory, but in practice, most, if not all, Moslems turned on him. Most, if not all, of the Leftist facility, turned on him. In fact, the facility bent out of shape to pander and empower the evil that is Islam that will make this American university on par with an Egyptian university if it could.

    Welcome to Winston Smith’s Oceania. Scratch a Liberal, find a fascist.

    meanwhile, the umma marches on, absorbing mindless non-Moslem American liberal “students” a la janissaries, on it’s march to victory over the infidel.

    • Leta

      The evil left has unleashed Islam on our country? What the hell are you talking about. Blame our immigration laws or something but Liberals don't want Muslims persecuted. That doesn't mean we like Islam.

  • Jerseychris

    You're "center left" ? And the people who fired you are what? Just a little bit left of center left. It's time Jews learned that the are rejected by their real co-religionists, other liberals.

  • oldtimer

    Go Professor. I hope your example spurs others to stand up for their constitutional rights against people, religions and groups who think they can do anything they like using our laws against us.

  • Schlomotion

    This is why I think people like Al Sharpton and organizations like StandWithUs should not cry wolf. Here is a genuine case of censorship and a legitimate First Amendment lawsuit against a university. It is the first one out of several reports on Frontpagemag that is actually true.

    • Boston

      Who are you and what have you done with Schlomotion ?

    • Ghostwriter

      Yeah,where is the obnoxious,Jew-hating jerk Schlomotion? Did aliens do the human race a favor by replacing him with someone who ACTUALLY uses his brain?

      • Schlomotion

        Jew-hating Schlomotion only exists in your mind.

  • StephenD

    "Miriam Joyce, a professor who filed a complaint against me is quoted as saying that she believes in free-speech but only if it does not offend our Saudi students."

    So, Free Speech is free until it is "offensive" to someone.

    Suppose someone is "offended" by the word Purple…would the use of that word be banned?

    My point is that the reason we have a law defending free speech is that eventually it WILL BE OFFESNIVE to someone and our right to continue to express those offensive thoughts are protected. If we only spoke words that are never offensive to anyone, why would we need a law protecting our right in the first place?

    As was said on these pages many times before; our right to free speech is our most valuable right. If you lose your right to object; if you can no longer disagree, then the one with the bull horn makes the rules…and there is nothing you can say about it.

  • popseal

    My issue with Islam is not the debate about radicals vs. moderates. The real problem is that Islam was founded by a known killer 1400 years ago, has been spread mostly by the sword, and doesn't allow for differing opinions about its violent and superstitious nature. If left unchecked, Islam will dominate the world and the killing of non-Muslims will be accepted on an international scale.


      Now killing people that offend or disagree with you is really offensive!

      til the Shout,


  • hippiepooter

    Professor Eisenstein is the victim of a totalitarian alliance of Islam and the Left. What really is tragically missing from Professor Eisenstein's account is the faculty and students rising up against this assault on liberty. I suppose – or at least one likes to think – that quite a few of his leftist colleagues and students dont like what has happened to him, but are afraid to raise their heads above the parapet in case they fall victims of the evil he is suffering. Or they've just had their value system worn down to such an extent by the mind control of politicial correctness that at best they're indifferent to the proto-tyranny taking place on their campus.

    Way to go prof. You're one guy who wont allow the Marxist left and their Islamist chums take democracy out from under your feet. God bless.

  • Rybbe

    Hi Jamie, will you consider compiling a list of offensive Universities, like PUC, who terrorize their faculty and/or students in similar manners? My children will be going to college soon and I would like to have a handy list of totalitarians to avoid when I make my decision on which bastion of higher learning I am going to write my huge checks to. I would have to include all campuses of Purdue on this list and it really makes me sad because I am a big fan of Big 10 universities. This story shocks me to my soul and I would be afraid to send my children to a place like this. This university would throw my child to the wolves to protect Islam. Very very sad.

    • curmudgeon

      among leftist universities, which is almost all of them, there are those who have abused faculty or students for not being sufficiently compliant with every anti-american idea ever invented, and those who are willing, but whose faculty/students are too wary or indoctrinated to violate the dictates of political correctness.

  • Guest

    This is not a freedom of speech issue. Freedom of speech does not protect your employment status.

    "The University has policies that say the right thing — their policies state that speech protected by the First Amendment will not be investigated "

    I very much doubt the truthfulness of this statement. This policy would eliminate the ability of the University to discipline any of its employees for anything they say, including personal attacks on colleagues or students.

    • guest

      All you would need to do is read Purdue's own policies, and I will quote here: "The University reaffirms its commitment to freedom of speech as guaranteed by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. Accordingly, any form of speech or conduct that is protected by the First Amendment is not subject to this policy." For so many of you, no matter how many times you hear it, you just refuse to believe that public Universities are not the same as private employers. The laws are different if you are a public University versus if you work for a private corporation.

      • coyote3

        Well, the establishment clause is about the government, and a state college/university "is" the government. Now, they could have adopted a different procedure, but as you cite, they did not. They chose to adopt the First Amendment, and they are stuck with it.

  • No Muslima slave

    Professor Eisenstein, you were correct, and your Muslim colleague is an idiot like the sick man she defends. She mindlessly follows a man who repeatedly raped a nine-year-old girl – shouldn't SHE be investigated for supporting a child-rapist?

    "The Prophet wrote the (marriage contract) with 'Aisha while she was six years old and consummated his marriage with her while she was nine years old and she remained with him for nine years (i.e. till his death)." Sahih Bukhari, Volume 7, Book 62, Number 88

    I would find her euphoric esteem of Mohammed to be "beyond despicable" – please let me know her name so I can tell her.

    Please continue to insult Mohammed – what an evil despicable character. (Yes, likely a FICTIONAL character, on top of it.)

    Oh, and Muslims constantly "insult" the "prophet Jesus," according to Christian ideology, by claiming he is not the Son of God, so perhaps Muslims by their very ideology should be punished for insulting Jesus.

    I'm embarrassed for any purportedly educated person – especially a woman! – who would defend this depraved cult. SHAME ON HER.

  • SoCalMike

    The Left ALWAYS sells out.
    The American Left French kissing and kitty licking supremacist Muslims should not surprise us.
    During the Cold War and the Vietnam War, they were sympathetic and even loyal in some cases to Ho Chi Minh and the Soviets. Even for the ones who weren't actually loyal, they still saved their best venom for Reagan in ways they never would have dreamed criticizing Breshnev or the Soviets.
    They spent the aftermath of the American departure from Vietnam HIDING the communist atrocities from the public in order to hide the blood on their own hands from the Killing Fields and the Boat People.
    The 93rd Congress (Democrats) helped Vietnamese communists murder the Boat People and created the Killing Fields of Cambodia.

    The current love affair they enjoy with jihadis is simply a logical extension of their self-loathing nasty and squeamish natures. They are the most despicable of things…..

  • RoguePatriot6

    They're trying to get their foot in the door one inch at a time. I'm so glad that someone is standing up to this BS. There need to be more law suites against this passive form of Jihad because I assure you, that they will not hesitate to file one against legitimate buisiness or law abiding citizens to further cow the American spirit into a PC cesspool. I'm starting to think that a large number of people beleive that only the Federal Government can be held accountable for violating someone's Constitutional rights.

    Look at what happened to the UK and Europe where it's an actual criminal offense to insult Islam. Obama and Hilliary attended a conference in December 2011 wth the OIC to ban all speech against Islam. In other words they and others alike are selling out our freedoms to Islamists.

    • Gerald

      Every time Muslims quote the Koran saying that Jesus is only a prophet and not the Son of God but the son of Miriam I am offended. Every time they quote the Koran saying that the Muslims are the best of people and the unbelievers(that is us, the rest of humanity) are the vilest of creatures I am offended. I think we should start suing Muslims at every opportunity.

  • marios

    G-d bless you Prof.Eisenstein. Wish you the best at ll. My deepest respect for what you doing to protect not only your reputation but our country.
    What is going on in the most US Universities with 90% of teachers/Professors stuff are leftist is a victory of stealth Jihad. Universities stuff behavior are what Muslims want : they already dhimmi, already subjugated people. It is shocking that after 9/11 tragedy which was Muslims world declaration of war against our country instead deport Muslims immigrants (including students) as fifth column US government increased quote for them. Especially it related to BHO who said in his Cairo speech that US "the biggest Muslim country". It was not slip of the tongue it was promise. He is working on it and each year of his reign 1 ML Muslims immigrated to our country. Hundreds of domestic and foreigner Muslims plot have been revealed by FBI.

  • marios

    How about mayor Hasan massacre in Fort Hood? MSM trying to silence this our officials betrayal of our country. Stop Muslim immigration till it is too late. M. Romney is the next President. He being Massachusetts Governor did not permit to come then Iranian Pres (Rafsanjani, I think) for making speech in Harvard. Harvard is one of citadel of Leftists and islamists.

  • Rene O'Riordan

    I can't read all the posts here – gotta get dinner!! But does Purdue have inward investment from the Saudis because this can cripple a University from being fair minded!! – God bless – Rene

  • David Marshak

    Would people feel this way if Jews and Judaism were insulted by a Muslim professor?

    • Spider

      No this happens all the time without incident. Just look at all those Israel divestment movements on campus etc.etc.

  • guest

    They play is to stop free speech against the god of darkness, mohammed. If he really ever existed.

  • Shelia Eleam

    Cheers for your very own energy source to obtain endured these kinds of using them concerning this webpage. Jack port i significantly precious knowing about it through your very own new blog posts close to some things. Actually, i know which you’ve various calls for attached to service hence the incontrovertible fact that people grabbed all the precious time precisely like you probably did to help those absolutely adore united states because of this post is at the same time genuinely cherished.