Penn Professor’s Fight for Free Speech Heads to Federal Court

The complaint advances a novel legal theory that could have major implications for universities as they brace for the incoming Trump administration. Wax argues that Penn engaged in race discrimination by punishing speech that offended racial minorities but not speech that offended Jews, citing a litany of cases in which the school declined to discipline professors who deployed anti-Semitic tropes and called for the destruction of Israel.

“Penn tolerated speech targeting Jews while punishing Professor Wax for speech about affirmative action and other racial topics,” the lawsuit reads. “Race therefore was a but-for cause”—that is, a key motivation—”of the decision to discipline Plaintiff Wax.”

If that argument is accepted by Pennsylvania's Eastern District court, it could become a roadmap for plaintiffs and government agencies seeking to challenge the double standards that emerged on campus after the October 7 attacks, when schools that had spent years policing microaggressions turned on a dime to defend the free speech rights of anti-Israel protesters, some of whom flew terrorist flags and used anti-Semitic rhetoric.

The hypocrisy was particularly glaring at Penn, whose former president Liz Magill resigned after she said at a congressional hearing that calls for the genocide of Jews do not necessarily constitute harassment. To illustrate the double standard, the complaint includes a table comparing Wax's speech with that of a fellow Penn faculty member, Dwayne Booth, who published a cartoon depicting Zionists drinking the blood of Gazans.