Arizona State University (ASU) has shut down a prominent free speech center and fired several faculty members following the protest of the faculty who opposed its existence.
The university decided to shut down the T.W. Lewis Center for Personal Development within the Barrett Honors College following a controversial event featuring conservative speakers hosted earlier this year.
The contested speakers were nationally-acclaimed conservative pundits Charlie Kirk, founder and president of activist group Turning Point USA; Dennis Prager, radio talk show host and founder of PragerU; and Robert Kiyosaki, author of a bestseller personal finance book and PragerU presenter. As AZ Free News reported in February, a group of 39 left-leaning ASU Barrett Honors College faculty led a campaign to prevent the event from happening, which included recruiting students to protest the event.
The two faculty members to lose their jobs following the controversial event were the executive director of the Lewis Center, Ann Atkinson, and the events operator for the Gammage Theater where the event was held, Lin Blake.
AZ Free News spoke with both Atkinson and Blake about their ordeal. Earlier this week, Atkinson came forward in a Wall Street Journal opinion piece criticizing ASU for caving to leftist restrictions on free speech.
ASU is back in the news about academic freedom. The Lewis Center that hosted an event with Charlie Kirk and Dennis Prager is being canceled. Honors faculty objected to having an event with heterodox ideas and silenced their opposition. Bye bye academic freedom and the exchange of… pic.twitter.com/2VAd4brvWR
“I wasn’t trying to do anything but my job: to do it well, and to keep people safe.”
For ASU’s Gammage Theater, Blake handled the arrangements for events such as calendaring, contracting, and client meetings. Throughout her career, Blake said she always offered the same respect and professionalism to clients, regardless of who or what was behind an event.
“Over the years I have booked and managed many types of events. Every one of them received the same level of professionalism,” said Blake.
Yet, it was Blake’s commitment to equal treatment in a venue designed for free expression that ultimately cost her the job — even though her superiors signed off on the event.
“Basically, I was sacrificed because Gammage executive staff had to do something to satisfy or appease the staff of Barrett Honors College. I was a scapegoat, and was let go at the beginning of April,” said Blake.
Blake recounted that her superior initially praised her for handling the controversial event. A bulk of essential personnel — security officers, backstage crew, and front of house — all called out, and police availability was limited severely due to ongoing staffing shortages and the Super Bowl occurring that same week. It was up to Blake to fill the gaps to provide a safe and successful event. By all accounts, she said she did — even her boss reportedly told her so, using a favorite phrase of his to describe her: “rockstar.”
By the next Monday, however, sentiments shifted. Blake said she walked into work facing a line of questioning. She was reportedly asked by her superior, ASU Gammage executive director Colleen Jennings-Roggensack, why she booked a “white supremacist,” an accusation leveled against the event speakers by opposing faculty. Blake was then required to get pre-approval from both Jennings-Roggensack and management prior to booking any future events.
Blake said the pre-approval amounted to a micromanaging that ultimately served to filter out who could and couldn’t host an event at Gammage.
According to Blake, Jennings-Roggensack had a habit of telling staff that they were aligned in beliefs, that they all had voted for President Joe Biden and Gov. Katie Hobbs — even if they hadn’t.
At a faculty and leadership meeting following the upbraiding from Jennings-Roggensack, Blake said she was singled out to explain Gammage’s core values.
After that, Blake described her remaining months at ASU as a “slow decline.” She was let go in April for “not being a good fit.”
Blake says she’s applied and interviewed for three other ASU positions. Each time, HR has sent her letters that they’re no longer hiring for the position — even though the positions remained posted as available.
“[This is] what happens to those who don’t conform to the prevailing orthodoxy on campus.”
Atkinson retained her position several months longer than Blake did. It was at the end of May that Atkinson learned from Barrett Honors College Dean Tara Williams that her position would end, and that the Lewis Center would be no more.
In an official statement shared widely by the press following Atkinson’s Wall Street Journal piece, an ASU spokesman claimed that the primary donor behind the Lewis Center, the T.W. Lewis Foundation, would no longer be funding the program. ASU also praised the controversial event as a success.
“Ms. Atkinson’s current job at the university will no longer exist after June 30 because the donor who created and funded the Lewis Center decided to terminate his donation. ASU is working to determine how we can support the most impactful elements of the center without that external funding,” stated the spokesman. “Arizona State University remains committed to, in practice, not just rhetoric, all things that support free speech and all of its components. The event in question was held and was a success.”
It appears that demonization by the vast majority of Barrett Honors College faculty over the Lewis Center event was the breaking point for T.W. Lewis Foundation’s founder, T.W. Lewis. He told The Arizona Republic that ASU’s environment is hostile to conservative thinkers.
“The long story short is that conservative viewpoints are not welcome at ASU. Or, at most public universities in America,” said Lewis.
The T.W. Lewis Foundation funds a number of other major conservative organizations and enterprises, such as GreatHearts Academies, Museum of the Bible, The American Conservative, Alliance Defending Freedom, Conservative Partnership Institute, Young America’s Foundation, Foundation for Economic Education, and the Heritage Foundation. They also fund the organizations from which the controversial speakers hailed: Turning Point USA and PragerU.
However, the foundation wasn’t the only funding source possible as ASU implied. Atkinson offered a diversified group of donors to offset the lost funding; she reported that Williams wasn’t interested. Atkinson also collected 18 pages of testimonials from students, families, and past guest speakers. That wasn’t enough to persuade, either.
“What ASU did not say is that the Barrett dean expressed no interest in continuing the Lewis Center,” said Atkinson.
AZ Free News reached out to Williams about the alternative funding. She didn’t respond by press time.
Atkinson believes that, ultimately, ASU policies have allowed this stifling of free speech to take place. Come fall, there will be one less place for free thought on campus.
“I want the right to free speech to our universities to apply to all people. What happened appears to be within the policies of the university,” said Atkinson. “The students lose. I’m devastated for the students. For so many of them, the 7,000 students in Barrett, this has been their home. Now it’s gone.”
As for next steps, Atkinson said she is taking everything one day at a time.
“I’m hoping to show the world what happens to those who don’t conform to the prevailing orthodoxy on campus.”
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
Gov. Katie Hobbs exercised her executive authority to take the enforcement of abortion law into her own hands.
On Friday — almost one year to the day that the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade via Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization — Hobbs issued an executive order rescinding county attorneys’ authority to prosecute in abortion-related cases, instead granting sole authority to Attorney General Kris Mayes. In a statement, Hobbs characterized abortion as a “fundamental right.”
“I signed an Executive Order protecting Arizonans’ reproductive freedom,” said Hobbs. “I will not allow extreme and out of touch politicians to get in the way of the fundamental rights of Arizonans.”
I signed an Executive Order protecting Arizonans’ reproductive freedom. I will not allow extreme and out of touch politicians to get in the way of the fundamental rights of Arizonans. My Executive Order does four things to the full extent of my authority: pic.twitter.com/2digbGB6EM
— Governor Katie Hobbs (@GovernorHobbs) June 23, 2023
In addition to strengthening control over abortion prosecutions, Hobbs’ executive order directed state agencies to not assist in investigations relating to those who provide, assist, seek, or obtain abortions; banned compliance with other states’ extradition requests for those who provided, assisted, sought, or received an abortion where illegal; and established an advisory council to formulate strategy on expanding abortion access.
The executive order declared that abortion restrictions and bans were inimical to equity for those who get the most abortions: non-white, disabled, and poor individuals. The order also declared abortion as a form of freedom.
“[L]imitations on access to reproductive healthcare disproportionately impact people of color, people who live in rural and tribal communities, people with low incomes, and people with disabilities,” stated the order.
In addition to abortions, the Governor’s Advisory Council on Protecting Reproductive Freedom will be charged with expanding access and implementing equitable solutions concerning sexual and reproductive health care resources. Hobbs will appoint the council chair and members. The executive order noted that the council would “reflect the diversity” of Arizona to include indigenous, rural, and LGBTQ+ members.
Planned Parenthood, an abortion provider which also offers sexual and reproductive health care items, expanded their resources over the past year to include gender transition drugs like puberty blockers and hormone replacement therapy.
Pro-life groups challenged Hobbs’ statutory authority behind the executive order immediately.
In a press release, Center for Arizona Policy claimed that state law only allows for the attorney general to aid county attorneys in their duties — not replace them.
“Arizona law, A.R.S. 41-101, Section 8 states that the governor ‘may require the attorney general to aid a county attorney in the discharge of his duties.’ Aid does not mean supplant or replace. In her zeal for abortion, Gov. Hobs has exceeded her authority as governor,” stated Herrod. “The law does not allow her to strip county attorneys of their clear enforcement authority as granted in various Arizona laws.”
Hobbs preceded the executive order with an announcement of support for the Arizona Right to Contraception Act on Thursday.
Reproductive freedoms are under threat. That’s why I was proud to join Rep. @AthenaSalman to announce my support for the Arizona Right to Contraception Act, which will ensure all Arizonans have the right to access birth control. I will never back down in the fight to protect our… pic.twitter.com/5TuG6C2icG
— Governor Katie Hobbs (@GovernorHobbs) June 22, 2023
Arizona law currently bans abortion after 15 weeks’ gestation.
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
An Arizona state lawmaker is expressing outrage over the governor’s decision to veto one of her public safety bills.
On Thursday, Senator Sine Kerr issued a press release to highlight Democrat Governor Katie Hobbs’ “harmful veto of a bill requiring sex offenders convicted of dangerous crimes against children to register on the state’s sex offender website.”
The bill that elicited Kerr’s attention was SB 1583, which added “that a level one sex offender who commits specified sexual offenses is required to register on the internet sex offender website if the offender was sentenced for a dangerous crime against children (DCAC).”
Senator Kerr’s release revealed that there was “loophole in state law, which currently only requires some offenders who have been convicted of sex crimes against children to be listed on the sex offender website if they are considered at high risk of reoffending,” and that “those who are considered least likely to reoffend (level one offenders) may not be required to be listed on this website” – estimated in the thousands by the Arizona Department of Public Safety.
Hobbs, in her customary veto letter to the Senate President, explained her decision, writing, “State law already requires offenders that are deemed the most dangerous to be published on the Arizona Department of Public Safety Sex Offender Information website. DPS will continue to ensure this information is readily available to the public.”
The governor added that she looks forward “to continuing to work on legislative solutions to keep Arizona families and communities safe.”
Kerr vehemently disagreed with Hobbs’ justification and accused the state’s chief executive of being clueless when it comes to this issue, stating, “The lack of understanding from Governor Hobbs is a serious threat to the safety and wellbeing of all Arizona families with children. My bill would have armed parents, schools, churches and community centers with a digital tool of notification, transparency and awareness in order to prevent these offenders currently not listed on the website from further victimizing our kids. Hobbs’ veto letter, which she erroneously wrote to the wrong Senator, shows she doesn’t have a clue what’s going on with sex offender tracking in our state.”
In her statement, the senator also discussed the safety ramifications of this loophole and bemoaned the partisan nature of this bill, saying, “Right now, if a parent signs their child up for a sports team, and that coach was convicted of committing a dangerous sex crime against a minor but is not considered likely to reoffend, that coach may not be listed on the website. When the parent searches the site and doesn’t see the coach’s name pop up, they are given a false sense of security that their child will be in good hands. Protecting our children from sexual victimization should not be a partisan issue, yet all Democrats in the Legislature voted against the bill and our Democrat Governor vetoed it.”
Senator Kerr vowed to bring back this effort next session “so that we stop protecting sex offenders and start protecting children.”
Daniel Stefanski is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.
Rep. Andy Biggs (R-AZ-05) is investigating reports of the northern border points of entry remaining open for 24 hours without any Border Patrol agents to man them.
In a letter to Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas and Customs and Border Protection (CBP) Acting Commissioner Troy Miller, Biggs relayed that he and other congressmen were receiving reports that the Canadian border points of entry have been left open and unattended for extended periods of time.
Additionally, Biggs relayed that unnamed sources reported CBP agents and staff receiving instructions to open points of entry for up to 24 hours a day despite not having sufficient personnel to operate them.
NEW: I’ve learned from sources at the northern border that Biden’s DHS is leaving ports of entry completely unmanned.
Border crossing data reflects an increased number of illegal border crossings in the same area — namely by foreign nationals hailing from Asian and Middle Eastern countries — which Biggs pointed out.
Biggs posed several questions to Mayorkas concerning the current hours of operation for points of entry along the northern border, as well as the staffing levels for regular and extended operating hours of the border and each point of entry. Copies of all memoranda, guidance, and similar materials relating to operating hours along the northern border were requested.
Joining Biggs in the letter were Reps. Tom Tiffany (R-WI-07) and Matt Rosendale (R-MT-02).
If Mayorkas responds with any affirmative of an open border policy — meaning, extending operating hours without sufficient personnel oversight — it appears that Biggs and other members of Congress intend to reverse those measures. In a press release, Biggs stated that there was no justification for such an alleged policy.
“There is simply no way to justify an open border policy like this and I look forward to hearing Mr. Mayorkas and Mr. Miller’s rationale behind their current practice,” said Biggs.
Biggs also accused the Biden administration of dismantling border security in the north as they’d done in the south.
“It’s unconscionable to hear that the Biden Administration would authorize inadequately supervised or even completely unmanned ports of entries. The American people deserve to understand the extent of this problem,” said Biggs. “There are numerous recent intelligence reports revealing that the northern border is experiencing an unprecedented surge in illegal border crossings—including by foreign nationals from terror-prone countries.”
My colleagues on the Left boldly assert that there is no border crisis.
They make these assertions while living comfortably in their homes in the Northeast and will end up never visiting our southern border.
Northern border encounters skyrocketed during the 2022 and current fiscal years. (Border encounter fiscal years run from October of the previous year through September). The 2020 fiscal year had about 32,300 encounters, while the 2021 fiscal year had nearly 27,200 encounters.
This last fiscal year, from October 2021 to September 2022, there were over 109,500 encounters — over four times as many as the same time period from October 2020 to September 2021, and over three times as many from October 2019 to September 2020.
Current northern border encounters stand to far surpass the unprecedented increase experienced in the last fiscal year. From October 2022 to May, there were over 115,500 encounters along the northern border. If the average per month encounters continue at this rate for the current fiscal year, there may be over 173,300 encounters by the end of September.
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
If it wasn’t already apparent, the Republican-led Arizona Legislature and the state’s Democrat chief executive will not be coming together anytime soon on measures pertaining to election integrity.
On Wednesday, Senator J.D. Mesnard issued a press release to announce that Governor Katie Hobbs had vetoed a number of his bills “aimed at increasing voter confidence, convenience, transparency and timeliness of election results.”
The bills Mesnard was referring to were SB 1595, SB 1596, and SB 1598. SB 1595 would have “prescribed additional requirements for an early ballot to be counted and valid, required a voter to present valid identification by the prescribed days after an election for a ballot that was delivered by a voter’s agents or a voter who does not provide sufficient identification, removed the requirement that the period of early voting must end at 5:00pm on the Friday preceding the election, and deemed the early ballot of a voter who is issued an early ballot during the early voting period after confirming identification and stamped as ready for tabulating.”
SB 1596 would have “required a state, county, city, town or school district office to provide sufficient space for use as a polling place for an election when requested by the officer in charge of elections.”
SB 1598 would have “allowed a candidate for federal office to designate a representative who may act as an observer at a counting center and prescribed requirements relating to the conduct of party representatives, challengers and observers.”
Senator Mesnard released a statement in conjunction with his release, saying, “To say I’m disappointed is an understatement. Elections are becoming more chaotic and more controversial in Arizona with each passing cycle. We’ve seen it take weeks, sometimes more than a month, to count ballots and determine the winners of races. Following the last election, I heard more complaints across the political spectrum about the length of time it takes Arizona to finish counting than I did any other issue, and it’s a problem we can easily solve. Ignoring these problems is a complete disservice to our voters who are taking their precious time to exercise their civic duty. We can’t just kick the can down the road every year. My proposals were commonsense, practical to implement and would have made a real difference in tackling some of the issues voters continue to complain about. I look forward to trying again to provide impactful election reform next session.”
The governor didn’t have much to add in her veto letters for the three bills. For SB 1595, she wrote, “This bill fails to meaningfully address the real challenges facing Arizona voters.” For SB 1596, Hobbs explained: “This bill creates an unfunded and untenable mandate for schools and communities. This bill once had an appropriation, demonstrating that it needs funding to be viable. However, it was not included in the budget, and as such, I cannot support it.” And for SB 1598, Hobbs stated, “As it is not clear what problem this bill is attempting to address or if any such problem exists, I cannot support it.”
Daniel Stefanski is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.
The Maricopa Association of Governments (MAG) hosted a race-based training discussing the evils of whiteness, and how only white-skinned people can be racist.
Racial Equity Partners conducted the training in April, led by Donald Whitehead, co-founder of the organization and also the director of the National Coalition for the Homeless, and Mayté Antelo-Ovando, a school psychologist. MAG has contracted with Racial Equity Partners since at least March 2020.
During the training, Whitehead claimed that “people of color” don’t have the capacity to be racist, only prejudiced, because they lack power.
“You can be as prejudiced as you want, but if you don’t have power, that does not become racism,” said Whitehead. “Power is what gives you the ability to become racist, and to participate in systemic racism or institutional racism. It’s the power that defines whether or not it’s racism.”
Antelo-Ovando added that the past wrongs committed by white people ensured that current generations of white people can’t be the victims of racism.
“The power that white groups of people have had historically, has created the laws, has created the rules, has created policies that have perpetuated inequities,” said Antelo-Ovando. “Therein, again, lies the difference between individual or group prejudice versus racism and the power that’s inherent in that versus prejudice.”
Whitehead and Antelo-Ovando further claimed that success arising from hard work was “gaslighting.”
“It is manipulating someone into an idea that is not factual,” said Whitehead. “We’re all a product of nature. We have no control over where we’re going.”
Whitehead cited a claim from “Between the World and Me” by Ta-Nehisi Coates that the idea of race comes from racism. Whitehead then claimed that race was created as “an excuse” to colonize, pillage, and enslave, namely by Christians.
“There is no biological reason for us to be separated by race,” said Whitehead. “It was first used as an excuse for pillaging countries for those that considered themselves either Christian or religious in nature.”
Antelo-Ovando then discussed whiteness, which she introduced as part of her point that racism defines current society. Antelo-Ovando then defined “white supremacy” and “white privilege” as reigning factors of present society.
“We are living and breathing in a racist society,” said Antelo-Ovando.
As examples of white privilege, Antelo-Ovando said that white people aren’t followed while shopping, are taught that white people made civilization what it is, and don’t suffer any penalties for ignorance of language and customs of the majority population.
Whitehead insinuated that racial-based grievances were more pressing than other problems people experience.
“When we talk about whiteness [and privilege], we also want people to understand that we understand that everybody has had challenges and barriers in their life,” said Whitehead. “The difference here when we talk about privilege, whiteness, and racism, is that those barriers were not as a result of your skin color.”
In response to a remark from an unnamed illegal immigrant participating in the training, claiming that white privilege affects him, Whitehead also claimed that U.S. citizens are selectively outraged by illegal immigrants hailing from Latin American countries versus illegal immigrants hailing from European countries.
“That aspect of racism, we see it in the news every day,” said Whitehead. “There’s a difference between how you see migrants at the border from Mexico are treated versus the migrants that are coming from European countries.”
Antelo-Ovando then claimed the existence of “language privilege” — the ability to be fluent in English, or to look like someone for whom English is their first language.
Whitehead also claimed that white privilege can be given and taken away depending on their associations with marginalized groups, specifically family members.
The training stated that white people use “detours” to not admit they’re racist, such as claiming colorblindness, innocence by association with other minorities, that other races can be racist, and that meritocracy exists.
The pair claimed that opposition to Critical Race Theory (CRT) comes from a place of “white comfort,” and the belief that structural racism doesn’t exist. They characterized CRT as a necessary disruption to the current, racist society.
The training also recommended participants read “White Fragility” by Robin DiAngelo, “Me and White Supremacy” by Layla Saad, and “How Good People Fight Bias: The Person You Mean to Be” by Dolly Chugh.
After our story on MAG’s racial equity training was published, MAG made the video of the traning private. AZ Free News was able to get a copy of that training and have provided it here.
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
