‘They are not snowflakes’: West Point can’t keep professors from speaking out, judge rules

The U.S. Military Academy at West Point can’t require civilian faculty to get approval before speaking publicly or restrict these professors from sharing their personal views in class, a New York federal judge ruled.

In a ruling Tuesday, Judge Cathy Seibel called the policies, implemented after a Trump administration executive order, a “blunt force instrument” that was not preventing “any real harm,” while at the same time blocking cadets from experiencing a robust classroom debate.

“They are not snowflakes who will somehow be harmed by learning about controversial issues or competing viewpoints,” she wrote. “They will not somehow be weakened in their future defense of our country if their classroom discussions are robust and open.”

The Independent has contacted West Point and the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York for comment.

The suit, filed in September, comes from law professor Tim Bakken, who accused the prestigious military academy of cracking down on his free expression through a series of policies meant to comply with a January 2025 Trump executive order, which barred the military from promoting “un-American, divisive, discriminatory, radical, extremist and irrational theories.”

open image in gallery

The following month, the suit alleges, West Point began instituting policies restricting civilian professors’ in-class expression, while requiring them to get advanced approval before mentioning their affiliation with the military in outside journal publications, conference presentations, media interviews, podcasts, opinion editorials, blog posts, and social media posts.

The executive order was part of a larger restrictive atmosphere at the academy, the suit alleges, as West Point officials and academics removed books from its library, deleted words from course syllabi, eliminated various courses and majors, and removed the publications tab from a faculty website.

One colonel allegedly told Bakken the steps were an attempt to prove the academy’s “radical compliance” with the White House’s campaign to root out “wokeness” in the military, the suit alleges.

open image in gallery

The professor said he actively declined to respond to certain student questions and was unsure how he would promote his forthcoming book because of the policies.

Tuesday’s ruling instituted a preliminary injunction against the speech policies, while denying the government’s request to dismiss the suit.

Bakken praised the ruling, telling The New York Times he could once again “search for truth, and not be subject to the censorship of the military and the government.”

The professor, who won a previous whistleblower dispute against the academy over its hiring practices, will seek a permanent injunction blocking the new policies.

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies