February 12, 2008

William & Mary President Resigns, Citing Conservative Political Pressure

Link: Brian Leiter's Law School Reports: William & Mary President (and Law Professor) Nichol Forced Out for Upholding the Constitution.

News accounts note that two decisions by President Gene Nichol "riled conservative alumni and legislators":

Nichol's decisions to remove a brass cross from the college's Wren Chapel and, more recently, not to ban a campus appearance by the Sex Workers Art Show riled conservative alumni and legislators. One donor revoked a $10 million pledge, even though the cross was returned to permanent display.

Legislators called four members of the board of visitors to the capital Thursday for a public vetting before voting on their confirmation.

President Nichol writes:

From the statement by President Nichol:

I have made four decisions, or sets of decisions, during my tenure that have stirred ample controversy.

First, as is widely known, I altered the way a Christian cross was displayed in a public facility, on a public university campus, in a chapel used regularly for secular College events -- both voluntary and mandatory -- in order to help Jewish, Muslim, Hindu, and other religious minorities feel more meaningfully included as members of our broad community. The decision was likely required by any effective notion of separation of church and state. And it was certainly motivated by the desire to extend the College’s welcome more generously to all. We are charged, as state actors, to respect and accommodate all religions, and to endorse none. The decision did no more.

Second, I have refused, now on two occasions, to ban from the campus a program funded by our student-fee-based, and student-governed, speaker series. To stop the production because I found it offensive, or unappealing, would have violated both the First Amendment and the traditions of openness and inquiry that sustain great universities. It would have been a knowing, intentional denial of the constitutional rights of our students....
As the result of these decisions, the last sixteen months have been challenging ones for me and my family. A committed, relentless, frequently untruthful and vicious campaign -- on the internet and in the press -- has been waged against me, my wife and my daughters. It has been joined, occasionally, by members of the Virginia House of Delegates -- including last week’s steps by the Privileges and Elections Committee to effectively threaten Board appointees if I were not fired over decisions concerning the Wren Cross and the Sex Workers’ Art Show. That campaign has now been rendered successful. And those same voices will no doubt claim victory today....

I add only that, on Sunday, the Board of Visitors offered both my wife and me substantial economic incentives if we would agree “not to characterize [the non-renewal decision] as based on ideological grounds” or make any other statement about my departure without their approval. Some members may have intended this as a gesture of generosity to ease my transition. But the stipulation of censorship made it seem like something else entirely. We, of course, rejected the offer. It would have required that I make statements I believe to be untrue and that I believe most would find non-credible. I’ve said before that the values of the College are not for sale. Neither are ours....

Hat tip: Brian Leiter, who as usual is on top of the threat to constitutional values implicated here.

What is the proper name for political correctness when exerted by wealthy alumni and state legislators? And what obligation does a state educational institution have to uphold constitutional values such as free speech and separation of church and state? What would Thomas Jefferson say?

Posted by Anupam Chander on February 12, 2008 at 05:42 PM in Law School | Permalink