We all know (I hope) that first amendments rights don't mean a person can express their opinion just anywhere. I see no way that a person can reasonably rationalize that a professor has absolute first amendment rights in a classroom operated under the administration. The professor works for them, not the other way around. He is an employee. If he doesn't like the terms of his employment, he can quit.
Now, consider this: What if that professor is teaching racism? What if he is teaching that blacks are inferior and should not have the same job opportunities as everyone else? Can the administration terminate him? According to FIRE, no.
I think that there is missing context in this quote: "The court noted that while “antisemitism is undisputedly a laudable and important goal,”
It sounds like the court is praising antisemitism ...
Correct. The full quote is: "Rooting out antisemitism is undisputedly a laudable and important goal. However, the unrebutted evidence shows that the Task Force Agencies and the Funding Agencies have gone well beyond that stated purpose." Its int he linked PDF: https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.cand.456332/gov.uscourts.cand.456332.90.0.pdf
I think you've got it dead wrong about Texas A&M.
We all know (I hope) that first amendments rights don't mean a person can express their opinion just anywhere. I see no way that a person can reasonably rationalize that a professor has absolute first amendment rights in a classroom operated under the administration. The professor works for them, not the other way around. He is an employee. If he doesn't like the terms of his employment, he can quit.
Now, consider this: What if that professor is teaching racism? What if he is teaching that blacks are inferior and should not have the same job opportunities as everyone else? Can the administration terminate him? According to FIRE, no.