Rejected Professor Salaita Wants U. of I. Job or Else He'll Sue

[1StrongBlackMan]

30. Great analysis ...

and you are correct ... it will be interesting to watch.

The only point I would quibble with is:

When it comes to government actions, both race (14th Amendment) and speech (1st Amendment) are protected equally by the Constitution,

That's not quite correct ... the 14th is absolute; whereas, the 1st is qualified based on many factors such as, the "type of speech", including what and how it was said, and the capacity of the speaker, i.e., political speech when speaking for one's self, on one's own time, with no intimation of a University connection is far more protected than speaking from one's office in the University, on a University line and intimating that one is speaking on behalf, or with the authority of, the University.

“Even worse, the administration’s actions threaten the principles of free speech, academic freedom and critical thought that should be the foundation of any university,” he said.

Free speech, definitely; critical thought, absolutely; but academic freedom, not so much. The A/F concept is not a blank tablet that always protection from every act. The academic is protected to research and write anything, within one's area of research competence. For example, a mathematician can write the most inflammatory criticism of Einstein's application of mathematics and receive absolute protection (assuming there's no defamation); but his/her A/F ends when, in that criticism, the academic launches into a condemnation of socialism as a viable political system.

(If I ever feel compelled to practice again ... this is the area I would take up.)