|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
[Order Michael Finch’s new book, A Time to Stand: HERE. Prof. Jason Hill calls it “an aesthetic and political tour de force.”]
Editor’s note: A culture of rampant lawlessness has been steadily growing in American academia. Our nation’s universities have shamelessly put their pursuit of woke leftist ideology ahead of their loyalty and obedience to the laws of the United States of America and the principles of freedom and equality of opportunity that inform them. The Freedom Center is exposing the worst perpetrators of this illegal conduct as the Top Ten Academic Felons, and we will be highlighting one school a day as we count down from #10 to #1. The University of Arizona is #9 on our list.
#9: The University of Arizona
As a public educational institute, the University of Arizona is bound by the precepts of the United States Constitution, among them the First Amendment which allows faculty and students to speak and write freely in their private lives without it affecting their status with the university. But a lawsuit from a recently-fired adjunct professor at the university reveals that UA has likely violated this obligation by dismissing a professor for his off-campus comments and activism critical of transgender ideology.
The faculty member in question, Daniel Grossenbach, had served as an adjunct professor of ethics at the university for three years when he was unexpectedly terminated from his position. At the time, Grossenbach was told that his termination was necessary in order to hire more full-time professors with doctorate degrees, a reasonable explanation that resonated with him. “If you have an expert, that’s even better for the students. That sounds understandable,” Grossenbach told The College Fix.
The professor soon found reason to question this rationale when he found that the university was advertising for an adjunct professor in his former department—the same exact position from which he had just been terminated.
“These advertised positions were a fit for Professor Grossenbach’s background, skills, and experience and were virtually identical to what he was already doing before Defendants terminated his employment on the pretextual basis that it was seeking a full-time instructor to cover his courses,” describes the lawsuit filed by Grossenbach with assistance from the Christian legal group Liberty Council. “In other words, Defendants were not even seeking to hire a fulltime professor for Professor Grossenbach’s courses as they had told him. Rather, Defendants were seeking an adjunct professor—who was not the target of an anonymous censorship campaign—to fill Professor Grossenbach’s prior role.”
After filing a public records request with the university—and waiting over nine months for it to be granted—Grossenbach’s suspicions were verified.
The university’s own heavily redacted records revealed that administration officials had discussed his work with a parental rights group, Save Catalina Foothills School District (SaveCFSD) which opposes the school district’s policy of allowing minor children to “transition” genders without the knowledge and consent of their parents.
Grossenbach, who has multiple children attending schools in the Catalina Foothills district, had founded SaveCFSD “to petition the district over ‘policies and practices of hiding minors’ mental health information as a violation of fundamental parental rights,’” describes The College Fix. “SaveCFSD claims the district has hidden minors’ mental health information, distributed gender identity surveys, and maintained secret lists of students requesting alternative names and pronouns, all without notifying parents.”
The organization’s website describes how the once well-respected school district had recently gone “woke,” resulting in 40% of families in the area opting out of public education. An ominous-sounding “Did you know?” section on the website describes how students in the district received a survey asking for their preferred pronouns and then asking for permission to use these same pronouns when speaking with a parent.
“Some [surveys] went further to ask other private facts like the minor child’s sexual desires,” the website adds. “As of today, no CFSD official or staff member has responded to these parents with a copy of the survey as the law requires.”
“CFSD Allows 18 Year-Old BOYS to Undress and Shower with 14 Year-Old GIRLS,” states another article on the website which highlights the school district’s contradictory attempts to explain its own policy on restroom and changing room use.
Incensed by Grossenbach’s activism with SaveCFSD on behalf of parents’ and students’ rights, anonymous activists apparently contacted his employer, the University of Arizona, complaining that he ran an “anti-gay hate group,” and spread “misinformation.” Shortly thereafter, he was suspiciously terminated from his employment with the university.
“This discrepancy fueled his legal action,” The College Fix explains, “as Grossenbach is now suing the University of Arizona, seeking reinstatement, back pay, damages for reputational harm, and an injunction against speech-restricting policies. He alleges violations of his First and Fourteenth Amendment rights and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act.”
The professor is also accusing the university of violating the public records law in Arizona by initially rejecting his request for documents related to his termination and then delaying fulfilling that request for 239 days.
The lawsuit filed by the Liberty Council details a much more convincing reason why Grossenbach was fired from his position at the University of Arizona than that initially offered by the university:
Professor Grossenbach was compelled by his sincerely held religious beliefs to form SaveCFSD, and he felt led by his religious convictions to urge parents to attend CFSD school board meetings for the purpose of petitioning the board to address this gross intrusion into parental rights. Anti-religious zealots turned digital critics connected over the issue in Facebook comments and bandied about to discuss a way to silence Professor Grossenbach and SaveCFSD. As is oft true of those determined to silence speech they do not like, the self-appointed digital censors settled on what they deemed the most effective method of silencing Professor Grossenbach—get him fired from his job. And that is what they went about doing, and in November 2023, the University obliged their demands.
The self-appointed digital censors and anti-religious zealots took their complaints about Professor Grossenbach’s speech and advocacy to his employer and lodged numerous anonymous complaints against Professor Grossenbach. After those anonymous complaints were filed, Professor Grossenbach was fired. Of course, knowing that basing its termination upon complaints targeting Professor Grossenbach for the exercise of his First Amendment rights is grossly unconstitutional and unlawful, Defendants provided a pretextual explanation for their actions. Defendants concocted the explanation that they had received funding for a full-time faculty member to take Professor Grossenbach’s place as an adjunct professor and to teach his course in the Spring semester.
In this manner, Grossman and the Liberty Council allege, these radical trans activists convinced the University of Arizona to illegally fire a professor for his off-campus activism as a concerned father.
“Indeed, responses and public records confirmed that Defendants terminated Professor Grossenbach shortly after receiving anonymous complaints about his religious speech, expression, and advocacy work with SaveCFSD and had internally placed a hold on his courses almost immediately after receiving those complaint,” describes the lawsuit.
“[The University of Arizona’s] actions have inflicted irreparable damage to Professor Grossenbach’s professional career and reputation, ended his academic pursuit of a doctorate degree, decreased his earning potential, and reduced his income,” stated the Liberty Counsel in a press release. “Further, when Professor Grossenbach was terminated, he lost a potential textbook publishing deal, furthering his financial loss and reputational damage.”
“Professors at public universities and colleges do not shed their constitutional rights to free speech and religious exercise when they work for a university,” commented Liberty Counsel Founder and Chairman Mat Staver. “Professor Daniel Grossenbach engaged in constitutionally protected speech, religious expression, and religious exercise and was speaking on matters of public concern regarding his faith, morality, and the community. The University of Arizona cannot fire a professor for his protected speech. Viewpoint discrimination is unlawful and violates the First Amendment and religious discrimination violates Title VII.”
For its alleged illegal firing of Professor Daniel Grossenbach and its abhorrent attempts to interfere with a father’s right to oversee his children’s education, the University of Arizona belongs on the list of Academic Felons.
Previous articles in series:
#10: Academic Felon: Golden West College.

Time to start defunding these Indoctrination Centers we once called Universities and Collages the same with the rest of those places cutting off their allowance 100%
Sue their woke butts off!!
So their administrators will all wear Barrels
“Professor Grossenbach was compelled by his sincerely held religious beliefs to form SaveCFSD, and he felt led by his religious convictions to urge parents to attend CFSD school board meetings…” (from the lawsuit filed by the Liberty Council)
The Liberty Council doubtless chose the grounds of religious belief because it was the most likely route to a legal victory, but it is a dismal situation, and any ruling would be a precarious precedent.
Firstly, it could leave unprotected those deserving of legal protection: if parents with no religious belief are in a similar situation to Prof Grossenbach, this precedent would give them no grounds for litigation
Second, it could give legal protection to those who do not deserve it: “religious belief” creates opportunities for Muslims to make further inroads into US law, or opportunities for self-declared Satanists to file malicious lawsuits.
This could be avoided if the case was fought on a non-religious basis, and if this is unlikely to succeed at present, then legislation should be introduce to facilitate this, namely to prohibit extra-curricular indoctrination of pupils during school hours (when they are compelled to attend class), either indoctrination in general, or specifically indoctrination to induce mental illness.
There may be sufficient legal basis already, however. Are teachers in public schools not recognised legally as “in loco parentis”? If they are, then there are surely grounds for litigation when such a teacher in fact acts “contra parentem”
How difficult it must be to pick just TEN! The ROT that infests “higher education” is disgusting! Actually the ROT that infests Kindergarten and up is disgusting! We need a law that makes SEX INDOCTRINATION a CRIME – even for TEACHERS!! I guarantee some “dirty old man” sitting in the park and showing little kids the books that the left goes to court to provide kids would be arrested and put away for YEARS!