UIUC Reaches Settlement with Steven Salaita
Steven Salaita and the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign have reached a settlement. According to a press release from the Center for Constitutional Rights, which helped represent Steven, Salaita will receive $875,000 from UIUC. According to this press report, he’ll receive $600,000 plus legal fees. Perhaps the $275,000 discrepancy is for the legal fees. I don’t know. The UIUC has already spent $1.3 million in its own defense. All told, this effort to silence an outspoken critic of Israel has cost the university nearly two and half million dollars.
Many of us had hoped that a settlement would include Steven getting his job back. For his sake and ours: to vindicate principles we all hold dear. I would be less than honest if I didn’t say I was disappointed.
But while this was a major battle for principle, there was a person at the heart of that battle: Steven. Since he first got the news of his firing, he and his family have been through hell. A protracted legal battle would invariably have been long and difficult, its outcome uncertain. It’s all well and good for those of us on the sidelines to say he should keep fighting—and he himself might have wanted to do so—but Steven has a family to support and a life to live. If this settlement helps him do that, I stand with him. Firmly. Throughout this fight, he has had my firm support, respect, admiration, and affection; now that it is over, he has all those things even more.
I know many of you will wonder about the fate of the boycott: though different statements voiced the demand differently, many statements had insisted that the boycott would continue till Steven was reinstated. It’s difficult now to know how to proceed. Because there was never a formal body that called for the boycott, there isn’t a formal body to call it off. So I’m only going to speak for myself. The boycott, I think, has been tremendously successful in raising awareness, in turning what might have been a backdoor, behind-the-scenes legal case into a full-on battle for free speech in the 21st century; certainly the university was always very mindful of it and its effects. I’m proud of that. But I don’t see a point in continuing a fight when its chief protagonist has resolved it. I know the boycott has been tremendously hard on many departments at UIUC, particularly those departments that were most in support of Steven. For all these reasons, I see no reason to continue it. Others may reach different conclusions. I respect their decisions.
As I was finishing up this post, Steven responded to an email I had sent him with the following:
We fought hard. I tried my very best to represent those invested in the issue with dignity and decency. And I hope this sort of thing never happens to anybody else.
I would say that Steven did more than try his very best to represent those invested in the issue with dignity and decency. He actually did represent those invested in the issue with dignity and decency. And while I don’t have a crystal ball, I’d be surprised if any university ever tried to pull this kind of stunt again.
UPDATE: According to this press report, the $275,000 is for legal fees.
Discover more from Corey Robin
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
-
Hi Corey, I had the same kind of response as you. And then I found myself feeling a kind of melancholy. This really is a Palestinian story of expulsion and continual movement of a kind of homelessness that even that word seems unable to name.
I agree with you that universities will not try this again. I know that you are right about that, and that this is where Steven really did represent his profession. I don’t think there are ways that the rest of us can pay him back. Continuing to boycott would not do so, nor can I imagine something else that would.
The situation reminds me of the way that the state system and international community talk about Palestinian refugees, as abstract individuals that are exchangeable with everyone else and can be resettled and paid some money to settle accounts. I suppose on a positive note-at least it’s not “necropolitics.”
I just find myself saying, “Yep. This is what it means “to be” Palestinian.”
-
Faculty on search committee/s could pay him back by offering him a stellar position.
-
-
“universities will not try this again”
One can hope, but there’s always a new ignorant generation to be educated. Painfully, with luck.
-
This capitulation ensures the exact opposite. It practically guarantees that it will happen again.
-
-
I agree with you. here at UIUC, too, it is a little disheartening. $600k is about 1/3 the football coach’s annual salary. U of I has very deep pockets, and play very hard ball, and were under no pressure (except publicity pressure) not to drag this out for a very long time. I hope this is enough money to keep Steven and his family going until he’s settled with a full time and permanent job.
On the larger issues, he did a stellar job. And he started discussions that need to start. UIUC and the press will stick to the story that he was fired for his tweets — but it is broadly known that he was fired for his support of BDS. That can’t be covered up, and it is very important.
Back on our campus — one important lesson is: a narrow sliver of faculty, in this case made up of Cary Nelson, Nick Burbules and Joyce Tolliver don’t speak for the whole faculty. They gavethe admin spectacularly bad advice –which the Admin was happy to take. The faculty as a whole has to speak for itself, and democratically. Otherwise this kind of catastrophe will happen again.
-
The other bright spot-Burbules and Tolliver along with the guy from Labor Studies were all exposed.
-
-
Disappointed, but understanding.
I think some university will try something similar, in near future.
The university ‘as corporation’ will not disappoint. -
I am a little disappointed too, mainly that he wasn’t reinstated, but also that they couldn’t impose a bigger monetary penalty onto UIUC. Notice that the figure was kept under the million-dollar mark – kind of the ‘19.99’ effect in reverse; it’s actually about a million dollars, but there is a psychological effect of it being reported as less-than. Yes, hardball. A few hundred grand is chump change to them, so you know that was deliberate.
I wish I could feel confident that a big public university won’t try this *kind* of thing again – perhaps a less obvious, less dipshit version.
Dr Salaita didn’t deserve any of this, from beginning to end. I’m glad he got a settlement, but he has paid, and probably will continue to pay, a larger price. In light of that – in light of his not being reinstated – I would think UIUC deserves some kind of continued sanction. Whether what is possible in that regard is also practical and effective is a question I leave to people who would know better than I. But in principle UIUC absolutely shouldn’t be off the hook for anything. Remember, they not only ‘unhired’ him at the last minute, but also had him quit his previous tenured position, his wife quit her job, and they sold and moved, etc.. It’s scummy what they did.
-
No matter how you look at it, $875K is far less than the value of a tenured position on a university faculty, so this is in no sense a “victory.” This is not a matter of blaming an individual for settling; I am certain that this is a good decision for Salaita and his family, and perhaps between whatever windfall the writing and appearances may be worth these couple years and the likelihood that he will find another permanent position he’ll end up all the wealthier for it. But on the political side the university doesn’t have his classes, has a significantly weakened Indigenous Studies program, and hasn’t even paid much to get out of it. Not a total loss, but a loss.
-
I understand that the situation looks quite different from the perspective of the victimized scholar and that’s a position I am not in (and hopefully, never will be.)
But let’s be honest: this was a complete defeat. We have now set a price for what it takes for wealthy donors or corrupt administrators to silence an academic whose views they don’t like: a little over 800 grand. For many of the elite who seek to destroy the public university and the values it stood for, this is chump change. Billionaire donors wouldn’t hesitate to spend 800, 000 dollars on a weekend getaway. What makes anyone think that this will discourage them from directing that “walking-around money” to targeting climate scientists, other anti-Zionists, socialists or others?
That’s why I think the boycott needs to continue. UIUC has not admitted they were wrong, they have not taken steps to prevent it from happening again and they have not rectified the situation they and their total disregard for academic freedom and faculty governance have caused. If the boycott ends, these bastards will have gotten away with it.
-
Hi Andrew, If you are the Andrew I think you are, thank you for all of the hard work you did to get the emails out in the public square.
-
-
perhaps between whatever windfall the writing and appearances may be worth these couple years and the likelihood that he will find another permanent position he’ll end up all the wealthier for it.
Ah, the fine art of concern trolling.
-
It was a measly settlement in view of what Steven’s future is likely to be. With no comparable academic appointment foreseeable, and an academic lifetime of about 35 years, with compensation of about $120,000/year, he should have asked for much more, in the millions. It would have been worth the effort. With a more sensitive and receptive administration now at Illiinois, Steven’s legal help should not have aquiesced so readily…
-
I am happy for Steven to have this over, but this is no way a victory for academic freedom or the freedom of speech. I changes nothing about how students and faculty and potential hires are treated by UI in terms of speech and the free exchange of ideas. The payout is, what, 2 1/2 years of Phyllis Wise’s salary not to be Chancellor, while she maintains tenure. The interim Chancellor made it clear that it was a comparatively inexpensive solution by stating that it was less expensive to settle than to fight for another year (looking at UI’s bills, way less expensive). The price of the settlement will in no way deter further actions like this; it seems like a lot of money for an individual, but for UI it is pocket change. For those who promoted and support the boycott, to now say that it should stop, abrogates any commitment to academic freedom or freedom of speech.
-
You’re referring to Michael LeRoy, who is a major piece of work on a number of fronts.
-
I wish I were, but I’m not.
-
Seriously, you’d be surprised they didn’t try this again? I’d be astounded if they didn’t. A substantial settlement with a gag order in the Finkelstein case didn’t stop UICU from thus stunt, and while the settlement hurts, it’s basically in the cost-of-doing-business range. The total operating budget for the three UI campuses (and UICU is the largest) is $5.6 billion. https://www.uillinois.edu/our/issues/budget___tuition/ a cost of less than $1 million doesn’t even rate. They misplace that sort of money on a regular basis. I don’t blame saliata for not fighting more, but face it, we _lost_.
-
These comments have made me feel much better today.
-
-
This is good news. Although I am still rather dissapointed in how extremely weak the response by historians was in signing the boycott petitions. I would like to think it was entirely due to antipathy to the person collecting them which was me. But, I suspect there might also be something else going on in the discipline of history in the US that might it adverse to supporting Salaita in this case.
-
This is good news. I am still rather dissapointed at the extremely poor showing of history as a discipline in providing signatures for the boycott petitions. I would like to think this was completely a result of antipathy to the person collecting the signatures which was me. But, I think there might also be something else in the current make up of the history discipline in the US that made the unwilling to support Salaita on this issue.