June 2, 2025

Dear Regents Acker, Behm, Bernstein, Brown, Hubbard, Ilitch, Meyers, and White,

The University of Michigan AAUP, University of Michigan-Dearborn AAUP, and University of Michigan-Flint AFT-AAUP have each endorsed the SACUA Statement of Principles Concerning the Upcoming Presidential Search. We write to you jointly, to underscore the importance of a transparent search process, with publicly announced campus visits/forums by the finalists. Transparency ensures that presidential searches serve the public interest and reduces the costs associated with unwarranted secrecy in presidential searches. In accordance with the principles of democracy and mutual trust, search committee members should be elected representatives of faculty, staff, and student constituencies, selected through processes developed in partnership with governance bodies, labor unions, and other representative groups from all three campuses.

Sincerely,

Julie Boland

President, University of Michigan AAUP

Emily Luxon

President, University of Michigan-Dearborn AAUP

Daniel Birchok

President, University of Michigan-Flint AFT-AAU

April 24, 2025

Consistent with the American Association of University Professors’ (AAUP) commitment to due process and free expression in higher education the University of Michigan Ann Arbor Chapter of the AAUP(UM-Ann Arbor AAUP) expresses its support for recently suspended and terminated University of Michigan workers and condemns the University’s crackdown on the freedom of speech and the right to protest, particularly at a time when education itself is under threat by the federal government. 

The suspension of these workers is a fundamental violation of their freedom of speech and the right to protest. On Monday, April 7, 2025, a full-time U-M employee and University Staff United (USU) AFT Local 284 member, along with four part-time student workers, was suspended from their positions for an alleged violation of the University’s Standard Practice Guide (SPG). Without evidence, the University charged all five workers with violating SPG 601.18 pertaining to “Violence in the University Community.” The alleged violation of the SPG provision supposedly occurred during a Palestine solidarity protest on May 3, 2024, which is to say before the full-time employee was hired and while they were a student. On Friday, April 11, the full-time employee was terminated from their position as an Academic Program Specialist for the Center for South Asian Studies (CSAS) at the International Institute (II). The employee who was fired was neither detained, charged, nor had any criminal proceedings brought against them. There is no evidence that any of these workers participated in acts of violence or incited violence at the May 2024 protest. A police report of the incident documents that the full-time employee complied with police officers when asked to put down a megaphone. 

While there is no evidence of violence on the part of these five workers, there is ample evidence of violence on the part of law enforcement officers, including the use of pepper spray and throwing a bicycle at protestors. As Judith Butler points out in The Force of Non-Violence (2020), “the power to attribute violence to the opposition itself becomes an instrument by which to enhance state power.” We reject the cynical and selective deployment of the concept of violence to politically target workers exercising their freedom of speech and right to protest.

We condemn the University for suspending and terminating these five employees for the reasons stated above, and we call on the University to reinstate them immediately. We also call on the University to respect the rights of all workers to due process, their freedom of speech, and their right to protest.

The UM Ann Arbor chapter of AAUP and SACUA invite you to the seminar series, Resistance and Reality Checks. These three seminars will highlight the work of UM scholars who offer alternative models and counter-analyses to the executive orders being issued from the Trump administration. 

Seminar #1: On Executive Orders
Wednesday, March 12, 1:00-2:00 p.m.
In person: East Hall 4448 ~ and via zoom
Zoom: https://umich.zoom.us/j/93502539371

Speakers: 
Julian D. Mortenson, James G. Phillipp Professor of Law at Michigan Law
Samuel R. Bagenstos, Frank G. Millard Professor of Law at Michigan Law

Seminar #2: Federal Funding Threats and the Independence of Universities
Wednesday, April 2, 1:00-2:00 p.m.
In person: North quad space 2435. ~ and via zoom: https://umich.zoom.us/j/95071330316.

Speakers: 
Demetri Morgan, Associate Professor, Marsal Family School of Education
Beth Berman, Richard H. Price Professor and Director of Organizational Studies

Seminar #3: Models of Resistance
Wednesday, April 23, 1:00-2:00 p.m.
In person: North quad space 2435 ~ and and via zoom: https://umich.zoom.us/j/95071330316.

Speakers: 
Geoff Eley, Karl Pohrt Distinguished University Professor of Contemporary History

Megan Flattley, Lecturer, History of Art

September 13, 2024

The UM Ann Arbor Chapter voted unanimously in favor of the following statement.

In Defense of Due Process and Shared Governance

University of Michigan Ann Arbor Chapter of the American Association of University Professors (AAUP), September 10, 2024

The American Association of University Professors’ governing documents and the University of Michigan’s policies both maintain the joint responsibility of faculty, administrations, and boards to govern colleges and universities.

The recent changes enacted by the University of Michigan have undermined these principles of shared governance and do not uphold the principle of due process. During the Winter 2024 term, administrators released a draft Disruptive Activities Policy (DAP), without faculty or student input, which was criticized in the strongest possible terms by our chapter and by the Faculty Senate. Nonetheless, in July, many features of the DAP reemerged in a new policy, SPG 601.41, restricting the use of University facilities and in substantial changes to the Statement of Student Rights and Responsibilities (henceforth Statement). Neither of these policy initiatives involved consultation of the Faculty Senate or Central Student Government, despite the fact that the Senate’s Student Relations Advisory Committee (SRAC) is the body empowered with primary oversight for changes to student disciplinary procedures. Together, SPG 601.41 and the amendment to the Statement do substantial damage to the due process rights of students, faculty and staff. Moreover, by undermining principles of shared governance, the enactment of these changes also undermines academic freedom.

On August 15, the SACUA Chair sent a letter, drafted by SRAC, to the Regents, requesting that they pause the revised Statement of Student Rights and Responsibilities and “respect the determinative role of faculty government in the amendment of these policies.” The U-M Ann Arbor AAUP Chapter supports this position of the Faculty Senate.

It is very concerning to learn that the Regents are now considering authorizing changes to the criteria for invoking the Statement’s “emergency suspensions” procedure, so as to authorize suspensions even when there is no determination that a student poses a direct threat of harm. The risk therein is that sanctions may be imposed in a disproportionate and arbitrary manner, and that political considerations may interfere with fairness to students. We categorically reject any assertion that emergency procedures are appropriate for students who have engaged in peaceful protest.

We strongly rebuke the Regents for passing changes to SPG 601.41 and to the Statement without consultation during the summer months. The timing of their actions leaves the impression that the University was hoping to enact these changes without sparking community opposition as it did in the winter semester.  We call on the Regents to reverse these changes, and we strongly urge the Regents not to enact additional changes to the Statement or to related University policies that would further undermine due process and shared governance principles.

The UM Ann Arbor Chapter has voted to sign the National AAUP statement published on April 29, 2024:

In Defense of the Right to Free Speech and Peaceful Protest on University Campuses (2024).

April 1, 2024

Dear Colleagues,

We write to express our objection to the university administration hastily pushing through a Disruptive Activity Policy that impinges on freedom of assembly and freedom of expression at our university.

We see this issue as very important to the mission of the university. U-M has a long history of student protest that current university leaders celebrate regularly. Past student protest movements have achieved the creation of institutions – the Trotter Multicultural Center, the Spectrum Center (to give just two examples) – that make our university better for everyone. Freedom of assembly is vital in ensuring that marginalized groups – who often ask in vain for opportunities to communicate with those with power – can communicate how this institution could be made more responsive, more equitable, and more inclusive. Historically, disruption of the status quo has been the only way that marginalized groups have been able to advocate for their rights, and it is only in hindsight that we recognize the value of disruptive activities in making our institutions more just, equitable, and inclusive.

There is a lack of transparency about when this policy was drafted or who made the decision that it was needed. To our knowledge, the statement was drafted in absence of genuine consultation with faculty, students, and staff. The President of the Central Student Government expressly stated that such a policy was not needed and that the perceptions of donors and parents were being placed ahead of the needs and experiences of students. Perhaps most surprisingly, the newly formed Committee on Diversity of Thought and Freedom of Expression was not involved or consulted. A survey with a turnaround of one week is not a substitute for discussion and vetting by the relevant bodies representing faculty, students, and staff.

Substantively, this policy draft is deeply problematic. Our concerns include, but are not limited to:

·  The lack of a clear definition of “disruption”

·  The role of an unidentified hearing officer determining a student’s future. The draft policy provides no details about the selection of the hearing officer nor a rationale as to why a student’s fate is left to a single person and not a committee of students, faculty, and administrators

·  Sufficiently vague definitions of “University Operations” such that the administration could weaponize this policy against any form of speech that challenges the administration 

·  Insufficient detail as to how the draft policy will interface with the protections to speakers, artists, and protesters afforded by SPG 601.01

·  Conflation of political speech by faculty with hostile actions referenced in UM SPG 201.96

In short, the draft policy seems to be a policy of repression directed primarily against students, but includes faculty, staff, contractors and visitors in its punitive purview. Expulsion and/or sanctions is the threat if any students, faculty, or staff speak against the administration in a manner that is deemed disruptive.

We urge the UM administration to reflect upon the sentiments expressed by past UM President Robben W. Fleming during then-unpopular student demonstrations:

“This is a time when a great international issue—the war in Vietnam—and a great domestic issue—race relations—divide our people. The realist would have to say that both issues are likely to get worse before they get better. The campus cannot be isolated from the mainstream of national life. . . . It is often easier for critics of the present generation of students to fulminate against their bad manners, which are frequently displayed, than to accept the fact that underlying the bad manners may be a dedication to human well-being not found in their critics. . . . A university is not merely a knowledge factory; it is rather one of the great humanizing influences of civilization. . . . My dream is that these values and aspirations will then be reflected in the lives of Michigan students and graduates.” (Fleming, March 11, 1968). 

Demonstrating respect for all members of our community means listening to and considering seriously the views expressed by marginalized groups, rather than ignoring or silencing them. We see this is the best way to improve campus climate.

Sincerely,

UM Ann Arbor Chapter of the AAUP

November 16, 2023

The Executive Officers of UM Ann Arbor’s Chapter of the AAUP wish to reaffirm our commitment to protect academic freedom. With reference to the AAUP statements on Academic Freedom in Times of War (October 24, 2023) and Polarizing Times Demand Robust Academic Freedom (November 15, 2023), we maintain the principle of academic freedom in the classroom–and teaching about Israel, Palestine, and events of the moment is no exception.