|
« AAUP Homepage
|
Rhode Island Chapter Defends Academic Freedom
By Gwendolyn Bradley
When women's studies professor Donna Hughes and the University of Rhode Island were threatened with a lawsuit last fall over documents posted on her university Web site, Hughes agreed to the documents' removal while administrators looked into the relevant law. Hughes, who researches sex trafficking, had received a letter from a British law firm threatening lawsuits on behalf of two people discussed in the documents. One document was an article originally published in the National Review Online, the other a transcript of a conference presentation made by Hughes, which was later published in Vital Speeches of the Day. She does not name the two people, but she writes that they are suspected of selling babies in an international adoption scheme and engaging in other illegal and unethical activities while representing themselves as activists working to end sex trafficking. The two, who have been identified in the British press, contended that they were identifiable even without being named.
Hughes grew concerned when months passed, she was not allowed to repost the documents, and she heard nothing from the university administration. That's when she turned to the university's AAUP chapter. Hughes and Frank Annunziato, the chapter's executive director, met with university officials and suggested several international law experts whom the university might consult. "Two things were at issue," says Annunziato. "First was whether Hughes would be allowed to post her scholarship to the university's Web site. Second was whether the university was willing to defend a professor whose legitimate scholarship became the subject of a lawsuit. We argued that the university had an obligation to protect her academic freedom in both ways."
When their suggestions were ignored, Hughes and Annunziato met with the Rhode Island affiliate of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), which wrote a public letter to the university president suggesting that the institution's "failure to quickly deal with this threat to academic freedom sends an extremely poor message to Professor Hughes's colleagues and the institution as a whole." The ACLU added that the decision to "force Professor Hughes to fend for herself if she wishes to defend her academic work is extremely troubling."
The letter prompted URI's administration to take action, and in June, the institution's president allowed Hughes to repost the articles and indicated that the university would support her if a lawsuit ensued as a result. "Our conclusion," he wrote, "is that your work . . . [is] protected by the university's firm commitment to academic freedom."
|