In Defense of Academic Freedom

A lawyer for the American Civil Liberties Union has criticized the California Supreme Court for upholding the dismissal of H. Bruce Franklin by Stanford University in 1972. The court action will have a “chilling effect” on the ability of educators to express their views, Margaret C. Crosby said.

She is wrong. The contrary is true. By its action, the California high court has respected the crucial distinction between liberty and anarchy without which academic freedom and First Amendment guarantees of free speech are meaningless. As we said at the time of Franklin’s dismissal, the faculty board “acted in defense of academic freedom, not against it.”

The issue, Franklin has argued, was freedom of speech. That simply is not true. His right to free speech was not restricted. He was challenged and ultimately disciplined because he incited students and faculty members to what his faculty peers determined was “violent and illegal behavior,” the antithesis of what is appropriate to facilitate free inquiry on the campus. The university computer center was entered and damaged as a result.

Stanford University pursued the case in a measured and appropriate fashion, providing every opportunity for Franklin to present his views and defend his actions. In a six-week hearing on the campus, 79 witnesses were heard in his defense. The university set an example of probity, of full respect for academic freedom, of due process. The courts have correctly recognized that.