The University of Arkansas has rescinded its job offer to Emily Suski to become the new dean of its law school, a decision that followed direct pressure from top state Republican lawmakers. The university cited feedback from "external stakeholders" for the abrupt reversal, which has ignited a firestorm over academic freedom and political influence in higher education.
Key Takeaways
- The University of Arkansas withdrew its offer to Emily Suski to lead its law school after she had already accepted the position.
- State Senate President Pro Tempore Bart Hester confirmed he urged the university to rescind the offer, citing Suski's support for transgender athletes and a Supreme Court nominee.
- Civil liberties groups and Democratic lawmakers have condemned the move as an attack on academic freedom and free speech.
- The university's official reason was vague, attributing the decision to feedback from "external stakeholders."
A Sudden Reversal
Emily Suski, a law professor and associate dean at the University of South Carolina, was set to begin her tenure as dean of the University of Arkansas School of Law on July 1. According to an offer letter dated January 6, she had accepted a position with an annual salary of $350,000, set to run until June 2031.
However, on Wednesday, the university abruptly reversed its course. In a brief email to Suski, UA Provost Indrajeet Chaubey wrote, "in response to feedback from key stakeholders, I regret to inform you that the University is rescinding its offer of employment."
In a statement, Suski expressed her dismay. "I am disappointed and hurt by the university’s decision to rescind my contract," she said. "I have been informed that the decision was not in any way a reflection of my qualifications to serve as dean, but rather the result of influence from external individuals."
The Offer Details
The offer made to Emily Suski was substantial, reflecting the university's initial confidence in her appointment. The contract included a $350,000 annual salary and a deanship term scheduled to last until June 30, 2031, with a possibility for extension. Suski signed the offer letter the same day it was issued, formally accepting the role.
Confirmation of Political Influence
The identity of the "external stakeholders" quickly became clear. State Senate President Pro Tempore Bart Hester, a Republican from Cave Springs, publicly confirmed that he contacted university officials to express his opposition to Suski's appointment.
Hester cited two main reasons for his concern. First, he pointed to Suski signing a friend-of-the-court brief that challenged a West Virginia law banning transgender girls from competing on female sports teams. Arkansas has a similar law, Act 461 of 2021.
Second, Hester raised objections to Suski's support for President Joe Biden's nomination of Ketanji Brown Jackson to the U.S. Supreme Court. Suski was one of 850 law professors who signed a letter urging the Senate to confirm Jackson.
"It’s scary that this person might have had influence on the next generation of lawyers, the next generation of judges in Arkansas," Hester said in an interview.
Other prominent Republicans also voiced their approval of the university's decision. A spokesperson for Governor Sarah Huckabee Sanders stated she "appreciates the University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, for reaching the commonsense decision on this matter in the best interests of students." Attorney General Tim Griffin's office confirmed he had expressed "dismay at the selection" but did not request the offer be rescinded, though he applauded the outcome.
Allegations of Funding Threats
The nature of the political pressure has become a point of contention. Democratic state Rep. Nicole Clowney, of Fayetteville, alleged in a Facebook post that the university's decision was a result of threats to its funding.
"State elected officials threatening to withhold funding to the entire School based on the political beliefs of the newly hired Dean is a new, terrifying low," Clowney wrote.
Senator Hester denied making any direct threats. "There was not a threat … Of course not," he stated. However, he followed this denial with a comment that many have interpreted as a veiled warning about financial consequences.
"But I think anybody can see if they are going down a direction the Legislature totally disapproves with, it removes their ability to come ask for help," Hester explained. "Why would we continue to support and give them more tax dollars to an organization that’s going against the will of the people of Arkansas?"
State Sen. Dan Sullivan, R-Jonesboro, also supported the ouster, stating that the law school dean "needs to reflect the sentiments of the stakeholders in Arkansas." He disputed the characterization of legislators as an "external force," arguing, "We (legislators) are not an external force for anything that involves state funding."
A Chilling Effect on Campus Speech
The university's action has drawn sharp criticism from civil liberties organizations, who warn that it sets a dangerous precedent for academic freedom and free speech on campus.
The Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE) issued a strong rebuke. "The message to every dean, professor, and researcher is unmistakable: Your job hinges on whether politicians approve of your views," said FIRE Legal Director Will Creeley.
Holly Dickson, executive director of the ACLU of Arkansas, echoed these concerns. "This sends a chilling message to every faculty member: stay silent or risk your career," Dickson said in a statement. "This is an attempt to carve out the heart of the First Amendment and replace it with political loyalty tests."
The incident has also been described as "an embarrassing turn of events for the university" by Arkansas House Minority Leader Andrew Collins, who condemned what he called "McCarthyite bullying from a group of right-wing legislators."
As the university remains silent on the specific details behind its decision, faculty, students, and advocates for academic freedom are left to grapple with the implications of a major academic appointment being undone by political intervention.
