The federal government has launched an investigation into Fordham University for allegedly misleading parents and students.
The controversy erupted when the university punished a student for posting an image of himself with a weapon on his Instagram page.
The letter from the Department of Education to Fordham President Joseph McShane warned that the federal department “has become aware of facts suggesting that Fordham University may have acted contrary to its own Mission Statement, Code of Conduct, Demonstration Policy, Bias-Related Incident and/or Hate Crimes and Weapons possession policies.”
The Education Department letter confirmed a civil investigation is underway to find out whether the school violated federal law “by engaging in substantial misrepresentations regarding the nature of its education program.”
The university, the letter said, “falsely” promised “protection for free speech, free expression, and free inquiry.”
Campus Reform reported Chinese-American student Austin Tong posted on Instagram a photo of retired St. Louis police officer David Dorn, who was killed while defending a friend’s store from looters amid nationwide, violent demonstrations.
Another post showed Tong holding a firearm pointed toward the ground with the caption “Don’t tread on me #198964” and emojis of the American flag as well as the Chinese flag. The “198964” hashtag referred to the date of the Tiananmen Square massacre in Beijing on June 4, 1989, Campus Reform said.
The university claimed the posts were “threatening and intimidating” and violated university rules on bias and hate crimes.
Tong has filed a lawsuit in New York County Supreme Court alleged the charges violate his right to free speech.
Fordham banned him from visiting campus without prior approval, removed his leadership roles in student organizations and his participation in athletics. He is also required to complete implicit bias training and write an apology letter.
The Department of Education told Campus Reform, “Of course, this raises questions about the influence of the Chinese government on American colleges and universities.”
An investigation already is underway into whether Fordham failed to disclose foreign funding sources, including gifts from China, the report said.
The latest investigation is into whether the univesity violated its promise not to infringe on students’ free speech rights.
“In its Demonstration Policy, Fordham promises prospective students, their parents, and other potential consumers in the market for education certificates ‘[e]ach member of the University has a right to freely express their positions and to work for their acceptance whether they assent to or dissent from existing situations in the University or society.’ Fordham further promises not to infringe on students’ right ‘to express [their] positions’ and engage in ‘other legitimate activities,'” the Department of Education stated in its notice to Fordham.
“However, Fordham fails to warn prospective students, their parents, and other potential consumers in the market for education certificates of their liability to potential discipline for the lawful off-campus expression of thoughts and constitutionally protected conduct that happens to be disfavored by Fordham’s education bureaucrats,” the department added.
In its response to Tong’s lawsuit, the university has claimed a right to “limit a student’s free expression rights.”
It claimed the postings by Tong amounted to “[p]hysical abuse, sexual abuse, threats, intimidation, coercion, and/or other conduct which threatens or endangers the health or safety of any person.”
The Foundation for Individual Rights in Education said Fordham “finally admitted a truth that FIRE and Fordham students have known for a while: Fordham just doesn’t care about student speech rights. Sure, Fordham makes big promises about freedom of expression.”
“The university ‘guarantees the freedom of inquiry’ to students, and claims they have ‘a right to freely express their positions and to work for their acceptance whether they assent to or dissent from existing situations in the University or society.”
However, FIRE added, “When it comes to actually honoring those promises, Fordham’s recent track record is ugly.”
FIRE explained that as a private institution, Fordham is not bound by the First Amendment. But it is “bound by the explicit, repeated and unequivocal promises of freedom of expression it makes to its students, including in its own mission statement: ‘Fordham strives for excellence in research and teaching and guarantees the freedom of inquiry required by rigorous thinking and the quest for truth.'”
