Table of Contents
Georgia legislator suggests professor be punished for comments on illegal immigration
A Georgia state representative is the latest legislator a public college to punish a faculty member over comments protected by the First Amendment.
Last week, Georgia Rep. Bee Nguyen with screen shots of social media comments made by associate history professor , an outspoken critic of illegal immigration.
While we celebrate the passage of the Dream Act, this professor uses hostile terms 鈥済hetto thugs,鈥 鈥渓ibtards,鈥 & spreads false narratives about immigrants.
Are these the values supported by Georgia Gwinnett College?
鈥 Bee Nguyen (@BeeForGeorgia)
鈥淎re these the values supported by Georgia Gwinnett College?鈥 Nguyen asked in her tweet, which included photos of Zhou鈥檚 comments in an online debate on the subject.
Zhou, who immigrated to the U.S. legally from China, wrote that he has a 鈥淒eportation of illegal immigrants鈥 sign in his office and that he 鈥淸does] a celebration dance when ICE deports illegals. MAGA!鈥
Nguyen said she objected to Zhou鈥檚 use of the phrases 鈥済hetto thugs鈥 and 鈥渓ibtards.鈥 And in an interview with the she elaborated on her concerns, saying, 鈥淶hou was sharing 鈥榠nflammatory terminology鈥 and espousing 鈥榝alse narratives鈥 about illegal immigrants, such as they commit more crime.鈥
鈥淭hose myths have been disputed many times,鈥 Nguyen told the AJC. 鈥淚 have concerns about him teaching those things in a classroom.鈥
Zhou, for his part, 鈥 and Nguyen鈥檚 right to criticize them.
鈥淓verybody has free speech,鈥 Zhou told , 鈥渟o (Nguyen鈥檚) welcome to complain.鈥
On this point, Zhou is correct. Faculty members at public institutions 鈥 like Georgia Gwinnett College, which has previously faced a lawsuit under the First Amendment 鈥 retain a First Amendment right to speak as private citizens on matters of public concern, even if that expression is seen as offensive or uncivil by members of the public, prospective students, or elected officials.
For example, in Rodriguez v. Maricopa County Community College, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit saw a faculty member鈥檚 commentary on immigration and 鈥渢he superiority of Western Civilization鈥 as discussion of a matter of public concern, and doubted whether such commentary, even when directed at members of the community, 鈥渃ould ever constitute unlawful harassment鈥 on its own. Faculty members may not take (and a university may penalize) discriminatory actions, but speech alone cannot be penalized on the basis that its viewpoints may be highly objectionable to others.
Legislators are, of course,welcome to disagree with faculty members on a wide range of issues. But as FIREhas noted previously鈥攁苍诲 several times this year鈥攖hey violate their special duty to uphold the Constitution when they use their elected positions to pressure public institutions to punish or investigate faculty for protected speech.
So far, it appears Georgia Gwinnett has resisted calls to investigate or punish the professor.
FIRE will continue to monitor the case.
Recent Articles
FIRE鈥檚 award-winning Newsdesk covers the free speech news you need to stay informed.