The term “Star Chamber” has come to mean a court that advances the aims of the rulers and is characterized by secrecy, arbitrariness, oppressiveness, absence of counsel, and an inquisitorial approach. Its focus is punishment, unlike an accusatorial approach which values the liberties of the accused. Keith Fink, attorney and former adjunct professor in the communications department at the University of California, Los Angeles [UCLA], likened his academic review process at the esteemed university to an inquisition in a star chamber.
Fink is a graduate of UCLA and a practicing attorney. As an adjunct teacher at UCLA, he designed four courses to get students to think critically about their beliefs: “Race, Sex & Politics: Free Speech on Campus,” “Free Speech in the Workplace,” “Entertainment Law,” and “Abortion, Gun Control, and the Death Penalty: Arguing Contemporary Social Issues.” In his classes, he used the Socratic method. He posed such questions as, “Should teachers provide trigger warnings before [discussing] a topic that some find offensive?” and “Can students be punished for burning the American flag?” Part of his Socratic method was to guide the discussion, push students to think critically, and encourage them to check their facts. In class, Fink expressed his opinions, too.1
He began to make headlines for defending students’ rights to free speech and, in doing so, for criticizing the UCLA administration. The precipitating incident was the 2015 appearance on campus of anonymous signs targeting the Muslim Student Association [MSA] and Students for Justice in Palestine [SJP]. In a second action, individual student and faculty names were listed. David Horowitz, who had no association with UCLA, later admitted to posting the signs.
In response, the Vice Chancellor for Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion [DEI], Jerry Kang, wrote an email addressed to the “Campus Community.” First, he said that the entire administration repudiated guilt by association. Second, he said that the second event listing names was “blacklisting,” a serious escalation that caused “chilling psychological harm.” He also said that everyone should “find these posters repulsive,” a statement that provides no room for disagreement. Third, he said that UCLA would deploy all lawful resources to counter any harassment or intimidation. Kang speculated parenthetically that those responsible for the signs would “hide behind freedom of expression for protection.”2
In his February 22, 2017 Sex, Politics, and Race: Free Speech on Campus class, Fink read Fang’s email, dissecting it line by line. He suggested that the DEI office was “more exclusion for people who have conservative views or perhaps Jewish views, but I’ll let you guys make that conclusion.” As for the signs, he asked, “Hostile posters. What does that mean—hostile? Why are they hostile? [It’s] political advocacy and who cares if they’re hostile?” He also suggested that in the wording of the email, students were “being threatened.”3
The discussion turned to a controversial cartoon published in the student newspaper, the Daily Bruin. It included a likeness of Israel’s prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, which some found to be anti-Semitic. The paper apologized. Fink said he thought the newspaper should not have apologized. But he wondered about the lack of a rebuke from the DEI office given its rebuke of Horowitz’s signs. “So, if I don’t see a rebuke, I just put two and two together . . . there’s some kind of viewpoint discrimination going on here.”4
Meanwhile, UCLA’s Communications Department [CD] had a new chair, Kerri Johnson.5 For what its worth, Johnson’s research included “How/why does the way that we move our bodies communicate whether we are a man or a woman, gay/lesbian or heterosexual, angry or sad?”6 Under her leadership, the CD swiftly reduced Fink’s class size. He was accustomed to teaching over 200 students per class. The department reduced the cap to 150 students and moved the class to a smaller room thereby preventing 41 students from enrolling. Fink went on Fox News about the downsizing of his class which led to media pressure on the department. The CD put the cap back to 200. As to its retrospective reasoning, the CD cited a collective bargaining agreement between Fink’s teaching union and UCLA which stipulates instructors must be given a “fair workload” and maintain a “proper and manageable balance” between students and teaching assistants. However, Fink said that he was never asked whether there were any issues with the student-teacher ratio.7
On top of that, Fink was up for an excellence review but was told he could not solicit student reviews. He pointed out the rules state that he could and gave them a list of 10 students’ names. The CD never contacted any of them. Fink accused the CD of being “vindictive” because he would not kowtow to its calls for “trigger warnings” and “safe spaces” and because he publicly criticized the administration. In addition, he said, he encouraged students to use their right to free speech.
In previous years, Fink had consistently received high student evaluations including in his 2017 evaluation. But according to the new CD chair, Kerri Johnson, and the interim Dean of Social Sciences, Laura Gómez, he did “not meet the standard of excellence.” They notified Fink that he was being terminated. Fink’s teaching assistant, Andrew Litt, speculated there was no explanation for the firing because “there are no credible arguments to be made that support the conclusion Keith is not excellent.”8
Commenting on why he thought he had been fired, Fink wrote, the “campus-wide emails [of the administration] run afoul of the First Amendment and directly or indirectly trample on students’ free-speech rights.” Then there was his activism on behalf of students: occasionally, he had helped students who faced campus disciplinary or legal proceedings.9
In a letter and email sent to Chancellor Gene Block by Sarah McLoughlin with The Foundation for Individual Rights in Education [FIRE], McLoughlin offered her analysis. Citing case law including Widmar v. Vincent, Papish v. Board of Curators of the University of Missouri, Healy v. James, Keyishian v. Board of Regents, and Demers v. Austin noted that decisions in state courts, the US Supreme Court, and the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit have emphasized that the rights of free speech and association extend to university campuses. She concluded, “UCLA may not retaliate against Fink for exercising the rights to which he is morally and legally entitled.” Nor could administrators “make employment decisions based on employees’ criticism of them.” She asked that UCLA “immediately explain what role Fink’s criticisms played in his teaching evaluation and UCLA’s ultimate decision not to renew Fink’s contract.” UCLA did not respond. Fink filed a grievance with his faculty union.
Fink’s experience with UCLA prompted him to establish a legal nonprofit to provide free representation to those who believe UCLA has violated their free speech rights.10
NEXT WEEK: Brett Weinstein, a biology professor at Evergreen State College, who resigned following an incident in which white students were asked to leave the campus for a day.
Nathan Rubbelke, “An Inside Look at the ‘Free Speech Class UCLA Blocked Students From Taking,” The College Fix, March 2, 2017.
Jerry Kang, “Dialogue Over Demagoguery,” CrossCheck, UCLA Equity, Diversion, and Inclusion, April 19, 2016.
Rubbelke, “An Inside Look at the ‘Free Speech Class.”
Rubbelke, “An Inside Look at the ‘Free Speech Class.”
Aaron Bandler, “UCLA Is Preventing Students From Taking This Conservative Professor’s Free Speech Class,” Daily Wire, March 10, 2017.
Lloyd Billingsley, “Meet UCLA’s Keith Fink,” Thunder on the Right, February 11, 2019.
Bandler, “UCLA Is Preventing Students.”
Anthony Gockowski, “Conservative Prof Loses Job After Spat With UCLA Admins,” Alpha News, June 29, 2017.
Sarah Brown, “Why Did a UCLA Instructor With a Popular Free-Speech Course Lose His Job?”, The Chronicle of Higher Education, July 1, 2017.
Nathan Rubbelke, “Conservative Professor Terminated by UCLA Files Grievance,” The College Fix, August 15, 2017.