COVID and Religious Freedom at UVA

by James A. Bacon

The University of Virginia has paid more than $1.8 million in legal fees fighting a lawsuit filed by UVA Health employees who were fired, despite religious objections, for refusing to take the COVID vaccine. And that’s just through November. Given the continuing litigation, billing has likely passed the $2 million mark.

Eleven former employees filed a lawsuit a year ago, claiming that the $3 billion-a-year-in-revenues health system arbitrarily declined to grant them religious exemptions from the vaccine mandate.

Hunton Andrews Kurth is the lead law firm for UVA, charging between $600 and $900 per hour for legal services and racking up $1.52 million in charges through November, according to documents The Jefferson Council has acquired through the Freedom of Information Act. Eckert Seamons has charged $240,000, and IslerDare $70,000. Continue reading

Morals, Coddling, Mental Illness, and Wokeness

Jonathan Haidt

by James A. Bacon

Jonathan Haidt is one of the most important public intellectuals in America today. If you’re not familiar with his work, you need to be. You’ll get a chance to hear him when he comes to the University of Virginia February 8 as a guest of The Jefferson Council.

The social psychologist (and former UVA professor) gained national attention in 2012 with the publication of his book, “The Righteous Mind: Why Good People Are Divided by Politics and Religion,” which asks the question, why can’t we all get along? In America, liberals and conservatives hew to different sides of six fundamental moral realms such as Fairness/Cheating and Liberty/Oppression, he argues. Differing moral sentiments translate into different worldviews, which inform different political positions. Moral intuitions are the primary driver, and reason follows mainly as a means to justify those intuitions. Though an old-fashioned liberal who has confessed to having never voted for a Republican for president, Haidt eschewed demonizing those who think differently. Liberals and conservatives alike, he said, are prone to group thinking, rationalizing their intuitions, and confirmation bias (seeking data that confirms their worldviews while ignoring data that doesn’t). 


Jonathan Haidt
February 8, 2024, 6:30 p.m.
Nau Hall Auditorium
Register here


Continue reading

Don’t Cut the Rattle Off the Rattlesnake

by James A. Bacon

Robert Grayboyes, a senior research fellow at the Mercatus Center in George Mason University, has penned a post on his Substack account, Bastiat’s Window, about the importance of free speech — even offensive free speech. As evidence, he points to his recollections of a controversial debate that took place during his days as a student at the University of Virginia.

Faithful readers of this blog will find the controversy familiar, for it is one that the enemies of Bert Ellis twisted during their campaign to block his elevation to the UVA Board of Visitors. Writes Grayboyes (his bold):

“In 1975, William Shockley, Nobel physicist-turned-white supremacist crackpot, was invited to the University of Virginia (UVa) to debate Richard Goldsby, an African American biologist, on “The Correlation between Race and Intelligence and Its Social Implications.” Some argued fiercely then (and argue still today) that the university should never have offered him a platform from which to disseminate his ignorant bile. My 2022 Bastiat’s Window essay, “Shockley versus Shockley,” explored why the university was wise to allow Shockley to speak and why those who attended the event (including me) were wise to sit quietly and let him speak. As I wrote: Continue reading

How Open Is “Political Dialogue” at UVA?

by James A. Bacon

There is widespread concern among critics of higher education in America that elite universities are squelching free speech and open dialogue in the pursuit of social justice. There is ample evidence that such is exactly the case. But institutions vary, and what occurs at Harvard or Yale may or may not be indicative of reality at the University of Virginia. It is incumbent upon us at the Jefferson Council to draw conclusions about the state of free speech and civil discourse at UVA based on what is happening at UVA, not what we read of horrors elsewhere.

Fortunately, in the age of the Internet, the partisan and ideological proclivities of college faculty are more transparent than ever — even if administrators are not. Professors leave abundant evidence in their writings and in digital recordings. Insofar as we have time, we will profile cases we come across.

We first became interested in Rachel L. Wahl, an associate professor of education at UVA who is affiliated with the Karsh Institute for Democracy, because she was one of eleven appointees to the Religious Diversity Task Force charged with addressing religious bias on the Grounds. If a purpose of the task force is to facilitate dialogue between hostile religious groups, appointing Wahl was likely a good idea. Not only does she encourage respectful dialogue, she researches what it takes to achieve it. Continue reading

The Jeff Recaps Youngkin’s Higher Ed Summit

It comes a little after the fact, but The Jefferson Independent has published a colorful and highly readable account of Governor Glenn Youngkin’s higher-ed summit at the University of Virginia back in November: “Freedom from Expression: How Youngkin’s Free Speech Summit Fell on Deaf Ears.”

UVA Needs an Honest Assessment of Its Covid Response

by Walter Smith

In late 2019, I spent sixty-five nights in the VCU hospital — first to beat leukemia, then to undergo a bone marrow transplant. I was dismissed to a post-hospital protocol of isolation, except for trips to the hospital. So, I was doing seclusion well before COVID made it “cool.” I found the hospital experience fascinating, along with “the science” of what was done to me.

When COVID first appeared, I was willing to trust “the experts,” but I lost trust pretty quickly. When Dr. Anthony Fauci was asked about hydroxychloroquine, touted by a French physician as useful in fighting COVID, he dismissed the study as “anecdotal.” The beneficial effects, he said, were never demonstrated in randomized double-blind, clinical trials. The very next questioner asked him about masking and social distancing. He responded he had no doubt those strategies were working — no need for randomized double-blind trials. My lawyer BS detector went through the roof. Continue reading

How Widespread is Cheating at UVA?

Honor Code

by James A. Bacon

Thirteen days ago, a University of Virginia student with the unlikely screen name of Worldly-Anteater3429 posed a question on the UVA channel of Reddit, a social-media discussion site. “What would happen, “he (or she) asked, “if someone tried to take a paper test outside the room?”

In a class of 100 or more, Worldly Anteater said, it would be easy to do. Worldly Anteater insisted he would never do such a thing but wondered whether cheaters would get away with it or, if caught, how they might get caught.

There ensued an exchange in the discussion thread that should be alarming to anyone intent upon preserving the Honor Code.

A student going by the name of Cthecookie said that based on his experience “almost half of the people I knew” collaborated in some way on the chemistry exams. “All it takes is one phone call to collaborate with your buddy on the exam while absolutely nobody is proctoring you.” (No one considered cheating in Genetics, he added. He offered no explanation of why that might be.) Continue reading

UVA Needs an Antisemitism Task Force, Not a Religious Diversity Task Force

We publish here a January 5 letter from 29 parents of Jewish students at the University of Virginia to Provost Ian Baucom followed by his response. — JAB

Dear Provost Baucom,

In light of the 337% increase in antisemitism in the United States since October 7, 2023, numerous universities have formed dedicated antisemitism task forces to reduce antisemitism on their campuses. For example, Harvard, Columbia, University of Pennsylvania, Cornell, Indiana University and University of Maryland have all established task forces or committees to combat antisemitism. NYU created a Center for the Study of Antisemitism. Those institutions join other universities that already had programs in place to address antisemitism.

Given those initiatives at other universities, and the rise of unaddressed antisemitic acts on Grounds, we were initially relieved to hear that UVA had likewise created a task force to address the current campus climate. We are disappointed to learn, however, that the focus of the task force is not aimed at addressing antisemitism but rather to “examine religious diversity and belonging.” The announcement of the initiative included a vague acknowledgement of Jewish hate on Grounds. It did not state that an objective of the initiative is rooting out antisemitism at UVA. Even worse, the entity states it will not have any recommendations until the end of the academic year. There is pervasive antisemitism on Grounds now; therefore, recommended actions are needed now. Continue reading

Who’s Killing Higher-Ed Transparency in Virginia?

So much for transparency

by James A. Bacon

The previous post, “What Is UVA Hiding,” highlights the excessive use of the “working papers” exemption to prevent access to the UVA president’s documents, emails and texts under the Freedom of Information Act. I might have been unfair to UVA. The headline implies that UVA, or by extension its leadership, is guilty of overreach in the interpretation of state law.

It turns out that many other Virginia universities utilize the exemption. ProPublica and the Virginia Center for Investigative Journalism at WHRO spotlight in The Chronicle of Higher Education how they were thwarted in efforts to obtain documents shedding light on Christopher Newport University’s encroachments on adjoining neighborhoods.  Continue reading

Look What UVA is Hiding

by James A. Bacon

Acting on behalf of The Jefferson Council, Walter Smith has filed a complaint in Henrico County against the University of Virginia, seeking a remedy for its refusal to supply documents under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA.) Smith serves in a volunteer capacity as chair of the Council’s research committee.

The suit alleges fourteen instances in which the University’s FOIA staff improperly denied emails and other documents to the Council. Smith’s FOIA requests asked for documents that would shed light on the inner workings of the University’s administrative decision-making process.

The cases highlighted in the complaint illustrate two main themes. First, UVA’s FOIA lawyers have stretched the presidential “working papers” exemption beyond its original intent of protecting the university president’s personal deliberations. Second, the lawyers did not apply privacy protections to Bert Ellis, a Board of Visitors member who was widely perceived as a threat to the university status quo.

“UVA’s FOIA process seems designed to delay and discourage and deny inquiries that may be embarrassing to the Ryan administration,” said Smith. “The administration says it’s all for open inquiry. These are matters of legitimate interest to the public. It seems hypocritical to hide so much.”

Under Virginia state law, the purpose of the working papers exemption is to provide high-ranking public executives some privacy in making decisions. If the public can see the decision-making process at every step, the logic goes, officials might be less candid in their personal deliberations. The exemption should be applied sparingly to papers circulated outside the decision-maker’s office, argues the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press. In Virginia, argues the Committee, the exemption has been applied excessively.

At UVA, the FOIA attorneys work for the University Counsel who, being appointed by the Attorney General, is theoretically independent of the administration. However, the FOIA attorneys are deeply immersed in the university culture, which is broadly sympathetic to President Jim Ryan and hostile to change agents such as Ellis. By their actions, they appear to be representing the interests of the university rather than those of the commonwealth. Ironically, AG Jason Miyares issued an opinion last year finding that members of the Board of Visitors represented the interests of the Commonwealth, not the University.

Here follow the details provided in an appendix to the complaint, supplemented with background information to assist readers.

Text Messages Between Former Rector Whitt Clement and President Jim Ryan

UVA’s FOIA team released the emails and text messages of Bert Ellis in a FOIA request filed by a Richmond-area writer. If Ellis’s emails could be made public on the grounds that he was a Board of Visitors member, Smith reasoned, so should the texts of then-Rector Whitt Clement who chaired the Board. Smith filed for texts between Clement and President Jim Ryan between Nov. 1, 2021, and March 3, 2022. UVA withheld 34 texts as presidential “working papers.”

Update

The writer in question, Jeff Thomas, relays the following: “UVA lawyers did not release public documents to me but withheld them. They and then the AG’s office fought me every step of the way in and out of court. After I sued, pro se, and won, public documents were released pursuant to a court order by a judge who found that UVA FOIA attorneys violated FOIA law. The attorneys who broke the law received no sanction, so far as I am aware, which leads me to believe that it is their unofficial job description to violate FOIA. Judging by your article, they seem to be doing so regardless of whose records are FOIAed. I do wish Mr. Smith good luck in his complaint as it will be an uphill battle.”

Community Safety Group Papers

As part of Ryan’s “great and good” initiative, UVA has been actively promoting “social justice” in the Charlottesville-Albemarle County community. Smith requested documents from the meetings of the Community Safety group of the President’s Council on UVA-Community Partnerships. The FOIA lawyers declared all documents off limits on the grounds that they were prepared by or for President Ryan for his personal or deliberative use.

Naming and Memorial Committee

The Naming and Memorials Committee was set up in 2021 as an outgrowth of the Racial Equity Task Force to purge the University of any taint of association with the slaveholding, segregation era. UVA lawyers claimed that any and all documents that may have been generated by committee meetings are Ryan’s “working papers,” hence, not available to the public.

Speaker Contracts

UVA has paid significant sums to bring high-profile speakers to the Grounds. These include former Special Counsel Robert Muller, Senator and former presidential candidate Bernie Sanders, and activist civil-rights lawyer Bryan Stephenson. Smith filed a FOIA request to see the contracts and related documents for these speakers. UVA produced a contract for the rental of the John Paul Jones arena for the Stephenson event but it was heavily redacted. Smith also asked to see any written understandings between Ryan and Stephenson on how the event, in which Ryan interviewed Stephenson, would be formatted. UVA produced some correspondence but redacted five pages as working papers.

Student Guides FOIA Search Fees

The Jefferson Council filed to view correspondence between UVA administrators and the Student Guides student club that escorted students, parents and other visitors on tours of the Grounds, often subjecting them to highly negative commentary about Thomas Jefferson and the history of the University. Wanting to know how the administration was dealing with the problem, the Council asked for summaries or reports relating to the controversy and for correspondence between the administration and the Student Guides. The FOIA team charged the Council $3,000 up front to “ingest” emails from the mailboxes of individuals the team determined would have been involved in overseeing the Guides, plus an additional fee based on how much time it took staff to review and redact the emails.

The UVA email search protocol is cumbersome, expensive, and works to discourage FOIA requests. UVA apparently uses a litigation tool to make sure it doesn’t overlook any relevant documents. In litigation, where one can be sanctioned or receive a spoliation inference, that makes sense. But is it necessary for simple FOIA requests for which a novice can search and pull up relevant documents in seconds? Additionally, FOIA attorneys redacted a number of pages from the production under scholastic and working-papers exemptions. Scholastic exemptions are supposed to delete only the identifying information, not the whole document.

Email Correspondence of Danielle Citron

UVA hired Danielle Citron as a First Amendment expert under its Jefferson Scholars program. Among her credentials was her service on the Twitter Safety and Advisory Council. Citron stated during a UVA event that she texted Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey during the January 6 riot at the US Capitol Building, to the effect that it was his fault that the “insurrection” was occurring because he had not removed President Trump’s Twitter account. Smith asked for all of her emails and texts from that day. UVA produced one email, asserting that the others were not communicated in the transaction of public business, and no texts.

That exemption was not extended to Bert Ellis. The FOIA team released many un-redacted emails and texts that had no direct connection to his Board business. University lawyers even released text threads on which Ellis was copied but he did not engage in. Quotes from the thread appeared in a Virginia Public Media article critical of him.

Admissions Policy

Smith asked for documentation describing the University’s admissions policies. He was particularly interested to understand how the office used the College Board’s Landscape tool, which handicapped applicants based on the high school they attended and neighborhood they lived in. Initially, the Admissions office provided some data voluntarily. Then it stopped. “I believe UVA FOIA interceded because the data would reveal discrimination” against white and Asian individuals, Smith wrote. UVA is violating the intent of the law by suppressing data that is in the public interest to know, he said.

Ryan’s Lobbying Agenda

Ryan posted on his Instagram account about his visit to the State Capitol on January 30, 2023, where numerous bills affecting UVA were being considered. Smith asked for a copy of his meeting schedule and copies of any documents exchanged with legislators. UVA initially denied his request but eventually released the agenda and withheld two documents as working papers. Smith filed a complaint in Henrico County court but voluntarily non-suited the case when the University claimed “working papers” again. “Just because a document is delivered to President Ryan does not make it for his deliberative privilege,” he wrote.

Ryan’s Deferred Compensation Package

All public universities in Virginia make public their president’s employment contracts. Ryan’s contract alludes to a deferred compensation package, and Smith asked to see it. “UVA asserted that there were no documents and that all understandings were in the versions provided,” wrote Smith. “There must be some understanding as to how long the salaries are deferred, whether they accumulate interest or some other valuation increase method, what events trigger payment, etc.”

Legal Analysis of Supreme Court Ruling

After the US Supreme Court issued a ruling restricting racial discrimination in university admissions, President Ryan and Provost Ian Baucom released a joint statement responding to the ruling. Smith asked for all drafts of the joint statement. UVA withheld two digital drafts as working papers. The drafts, Smith contends, are not working papers because the exemption is personal to the president of a university, not its provost.

Missing Hate Mail Texts 

Erik Ramirez-Weaver, head of the Faculty Senate’s Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion committee, told the Committee that he had received a lot of hate mail and texts from what he labeled as the “white supremacist community” after he sponsored a resolution condemning Ellis’s nomination to the Board of Visitors and asked the General Assembly to block his appointment. Smith asked for copies of the threatening emails and texts. The FOIA attorneys provided a copy of one email, which was critical of Ramirez-Weaver’s conduct but not threatening in the least. If the grand total of “hate mail” consisted of one non-threatening email, Smith argued, Ramirez-Weaver should be reprimanded for making up the claim.

Fall 2022 Mass Shooting

In the fall of 2022, UVA student Christopher Darnell Jones was charged with shooting five fellow students, killing three. Jones had been flagged by university officials as a potential danger and referred to the Judiciary Committee, but no action was taken. Smith asked for the documents presented to the committee, but they were withheld on the grounds that they were scholastic records. In a second request, he asked for assessments made by the Threat Assessment team in 2022-23. All were withheld, based on citations of the state code. However, Smith writes, the code contains an exception for individuals whose actions caused death or serious bodily injury, which Jones’ actions assuredly did.

Free Expression Committee

In 2o2o Ryan appointed a free expression committee to compose a statement regarding UVA’s policy on free speech. That committee wrote several drafts of the position, the final version of which was adopted by the Board of Visitors. The drafts were shared with all members of the Committee. Only the final version was submitted to Ryan, and only at that point did it become a working paper, Smith contended. Smith asked to see the drafts to get a sense of the debate that took place. His request was denied.

Statement on Israel-Gaza Conflict

On November 6, Ryan, Provost Ian Baucom and Chief Operating Officer J.J. Davis issued a statement updating the UVA community on its response to the Hamas-Israel conflict. Smith asked to see the drafts. The FOIA office revealed that there were eight but Smith was not entitled to see them on the grounds that they were working papers. But the working-papers exemption applies to the President alone.

The UVA President sits atop a vast administrative machinery which addresses a wide range of topics critical to the university’s functioning. UVA’s lawyers refuse to let the public see Ryan’s full terms of employment, his communications with the rector and other university officials, his interactions with legislators, the deliberations of important policy-making committees, and guidance from the University counsel’s office regarding US Supreme Court rulings. While zealously protecting Ryan, the same attorneys have opened the FOIA sluice gates to those who use his communications to embarrass Ellis.

UVA, Virginia’s flagship university, is setting a terrible example of transparency.