Rutgers president orders further investigation into history professor disciplined for offensive Facebook post

In May 2018, a Rutgers University history professor posted an anti-white rant on Facebook, which the university found to have violated its policy on discrimination and harassment. In a challenge to the disciplinary action taken against the professor, the president of Rutgers called for a more rigorous investigation into the post’s language, citing the importance of Free Speech on college campuses.

Key Players

James Livingston, who lives in New York City, is a tenured history professor at Rutgers University. As a result of social media posts deemed to be inflammatory, he faced an investigation at Rutgers that led to disciplinary action.

Robert Barchi is president of Rutgers. Apparently unaware that another university office had found Livingston’s rant in violation of school harassment and discrimination rules, Barchi ordered that the matter undergo another review. He argued that the case needed to be examined by First Amendment experts who might shed light on speech and academic freedom issues.

Further Details

In May 2018, Livingston wrote a Facebook post from a restaurant in his Harlem neighborhood about his growing frustration with gentrification. “OK, officially, I now hate white people,” he wrote. “I am a white people, for God’s sake, but can we keep them — us — out of my neighborhood?” He continued on to complain that the restaurant was “overrun with little Caucasian ***holes who know their parents will approve of everything they do.” He concluded his rant with, “I hereby resign from my race.”

Several news sources, including The Daily Caller, quickly picked up the post. Livingston was soon overwhelmed with a wave of death threats and hate mail. Moreover, Rutgers launched an investigation into his post, concluding that he had violated the university’s policy against discrimination and harassment, the San Francisco Chronicle reports.

Livingston attempted to appeal, arguing that his post was satirical and not intended to be racist. However, the school stuck to its decision and said it was entertaining the possibility of disciplinary measures against Livingston. The university’s position was supported by many, both inside and outside Rutgers, who complained that Livingston’s “I hate white people” post was offensive and inappropriate. The post was removed from Facebook, for instance, for violating its standards on hate speech.

The San Francisco Chronicle reported, “While Livingston’s words angered many, the ruling against him infuriated others, who felt it violated his constitutional rights. A petition supporting him was started, and the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education, a group that advocates for freedom of speech, called on the public university to overturn the finding.”

The president of the university, Robert Barchi, sided with those who supported Livingston’s right to post. On Aug. 29, he wrote a letter to Dean Peter March, saying, “Like many in our community, I found that Professor Livingston’s comments showed especially poor judgment, were offensive, and, despite the professor’s claims of satire, were not at all funny.” However, he went on to argue, “At the same time, few values are as important to the university as the protection of First Amendment rights — even when the speech we are protecting is insensitive and reckless.”

Outcome

In his letter, Barchi asked the Rutgers Office of Employment Equity to “more rigorously analyze the facts and the assumptions underlying its conclusions.” In essence, he overturned the decision and ordered a new review.

Additionally, The Chronicle of Higher Education reports, the “university’s general counsel will also form a group to provide guidance on potential policy violations that involve academic freedom and the First Amendment.”

School makes decision on Livingston

On November 15, 2018, Rutgers University reversed its earlier decision to sanction Livingston, according to northjersey.com.

“I’m relieved that my right to free speech and my academic freedom have been validated by this retraction,” Livingston said in a statement.

It was also reported that Livingston, who has taught at the school since 1988, had faced disciplinary action “up to and including discharge.”

Rutgers administrators offered no explanation behind the reversal, saying the university does not comment on personnel matters.