The accusations against the professor, who had invited a white nationalist to her class and said that Black people and women were less intelligent, led students and others to call for her to be fired.Credit...Rachel Wisniewski for The New York Times

By Vimal Patel and Stephanie Saul

Sept. 23, 2024, 6:51 p.m. ET

Listen to this article · 5:28 min Learn more

Share full article

The University of Pennsylvania is suspending Amy Wax, a tenured law professor accused of making racist, sexist and homophobic remarks, for a year with half pay. It is a significant sanction but one that falls short of the firing that some students wanted.

The university issued a “public letter of reprimand” to Dr. Wax describing the terms of her suspension, which will begin in the fall of 2025 and which also includes the loss of her named chair and the loss of summer pay in perpetuity.

Disciplinary proceedings against Dr. Wax tested the tenure protections of professors and whether such protections allow them to voice opinions that many might find inappropriate or downright insulting. Many students said that they could not trust Dr. Wax to grade students without bias. But many professors — even those who found her comments profoundly racist — objected to disciplining her on the grounds of academic freedom.

Among allegations against her were that she had described some non-Western countries as “shitholes” and had said that “women, on average, are less knowledgeable than men.” She has said that Black people from the United States and people from non-Western countries feel shame for the “outsized achievements and contributions” of Western people, and has derided as unrealistic television ads depicting “Black men married to white women in an upper-class picket-fence house.”

Dr. Wax denied making some of the comments and said that others were taken out of context.

She has also invited a white nationalist, Jared Taylor, to class.

In a 12-page complaint filed in 2023, Theodore Ruger, the law school dean at the time, wrote that Dr. Wax had demonstrated “callous and flagrant disregard” for students, faculty and staff, subjecting them to “intentional and incessant racist, sexist, xenophobic and homophobic actions and statements.”

Her statements, the complaint added, “have led students and faculty to reasonably believe they will be subjected to discriminatory animus if they come into contact with her.” Mr. Ruger declined to comment on Monday.

Dr. Wax declined to comment on the decision. She has previously warned that she will sue the university if she is disciplined. A lawyer for Dr. Wax, David J. Shapiro, also declined to comment.

For several free speech groups, the case represented a threat to one of the key tenets of academic tenure — the right of faculty members to speak freely, without fear of punishment, whether in public or in the classroom.

Reacting to the suspension, Alex Morey, an official with the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression, a free speech group, said that Penn’s decision “should send a chill down the spine of every faculty member, not just at Penn but at every private institution around the country.”

Ms. Morey, the group’s director of campus rights advocacy, argued that Penn had altered its customary disciplinary procedure to prosecute Dr. Wax. She added that she was gratified that Penn had not revoke Dr. Wax’s tenure, which she said was evidence of how flimsy the accusations were.

Peter Wood, president of the conservative-leaning National Association of Scholars, where Dr. Wax serves on the board, accused the university of a “serious error of judgment.”

“Professor Wax’s various statements on race, gender, ethnicity, immigration, inculturation and other matters were entirely within the zone of academic freedom,” he said, predicting that Dr. Wax would not “back down.”

A former assistant to the U.S. solicitor general, Dr. Wax argued 15 cases before the Supreme Court. Though Dr. Wax’s outspoken viewpoints have been a subject of debate for years, student demands for sanctions began in earnest in 2017, after she co-wrote an opinion article arguing that “all cultures are not equal.”

The long-running disciplinary case had gone before a faculty hearing committee. The university’s hearing board has said it does not dispute that academic freedom protects Dr. Wax’s speech, but said that she had violated “behavioral professional norms” in the way she presented her views.

The reprimand letter to Dr. Wax, dated Sept. 24 and signed by the university’s provost, John L. Jackson Jr., said that while academic freedom should be “very broad,” professors must conduct themselves “in a manner that conveys a willingness to assess all students fairly.”

It said Dr. Wax’s conduct had included making “sweeping generalizations about groups by race, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation and immigration status. It also said that she had breached “the requirement that student grades be kept private by publicly speaking about the grades of law students by race, and continuing to do so even after being cautioned by the dean that it was a violation of university policy.”

The letter said that the university’s interim president, J. Larry Jameson, had confirmed the decision to suspend Dr. Wax. Because the academic year has already started, the suspension, which was first disclosed by The Philadelphia Inquirer, will not begin until next fall.

The letter also said that, in future public appearances, Dr. Wax must say that she was speaking for herself and not on behalf of the university.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5600632&forum_id=2Reputation#48125941)

(2) and had said that “women, on average, are less knowledgeable than men.”

(3) She has said that Black people from the United States and people from non-Western countries feel shame for the “outsized achievements and contributions” of Western people,

(4) and has derided as unrealistic television ads depicting “Black men married to white women in an upper-class picket-fence house.”

Dr. Wax denied making some of the comments and said that others were taken out of context.

(5) She has also invited a white nationalist, Jared Taylor, to class."

(1) is true

(2) is probably true, but there are lots of exceptions, of course

(3) is possible, but i don't know if true

(4) is worth discussing in class. i don't think it's unrealistic, just wildly overrepresented in advertising.

(5) is a good teaching device for a law school class. see how students debate him in real time. spend the next class discussing how to better debate him.

tldr: she dindu nothin

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5600632&forum_id=2Reputation#48126300)

didn't she also say that black law students at Penn are rarely in the top 10% or 25%? to which Penn says, "the greater the truth the greater the libel."

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5600632&forum_id=2Reputation#48126312)

Less so with the next case, when comments Wax also made in 2017 were resurfaced, in which she said, “I don’t think I’ve ever seen a black student graduate in the top quarter of the class, and rarely, rarely, in the top half. I can think of one or two students who scored in the top half of my required first-year course.” This apparently violated Penn’s policies on the confidentiality of student grades, and Ted Ruger, the dean of Penn Law, stripped Wax of her mandatory first-year course. (Ruger also stated her claims were false.) Ruger pointedly endorsed Wax’s academic freedom and explicitly stated the punishment was for breach of student confidentiality."

how did that violate confidentiality? she said there were two exceptions

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5600632&forum_id=2Reputation#48126338)

second, i suppose the best argument is that she broadly revealed the grades of nearly every black student who took her class. but if we are going to interpret the prohibition that broadly i imagine that there's a lot of statements that would have to be forbidden. for example, we'd not be able to talk about women and men have success or not in grades.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5600632&forum_id=2Reputation#48126394)

i suppose, though, that with the cum laude, etc., we'd imply consent of the students.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5600632&forum_id=2Reputation#48126520)

there are no exceptions to an average.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5600632&forum_id=2Reputation#48126532)

nice.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5600632&forum_id=2Reputation#48126537)

stating something as an average can be exceedingly misleading

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5600632&forum_id=2Reputation#48127035)

WAX IS WANING

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5600632&forum_id=2Reputation#48126556)

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5600632&forum_id=2Reputation#48126716)