I asked the Sixth Circuit to speed return of the case to the District Court to allow the District Court enough time to return me to teaching this semester.

The Sixth Circuit reversed the District Court’s decision to abstain from hearing the case and remanded to the District Court to decide my motion to return to teaching during the pendency of the litigation. Here is a recording of oral argument in the case, which was held on July 28, 2026 (source).

Brandeis Center is one of the principal architects of the Palestine exception to free speech on campus. Its founder and CEO once declared that losing antisemitism cases is still a win for him because “[t]hese cases – even when rejected – expose administrators to bad publicity.” Here is my response opposing Brandeis Center’s filing of…

Here is my reply, which points out that the University and the Kentucky Attorney General didn’t respond to one of my arguments and didn’t meaningfully argue two others. They primarily contested matters relating to application of the First Amendment—making arguments that, if accepted, would all but eliminate faculty freedom of speech.

Here is the principal brief in my appeal.

I petitioned for the panel to rehear my motion for an injunction pending appeal or for the full court to rehear it en banc. Update: On March 23, 2026, the Sixth Circuit denied the petition.

The court of appeals granted the motion to expedite briefing in part. The court did not issue an opinion.

My motion for an expedited briefing schedule for the appeal discusses some of the issues overlooked by the appeals court in its denial of my motion for an injunction pending appeal.

Like the District Court, this panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals declined to address the merits of my First Amendment and due process claims and instead focused on whether it makes sense for federal courts to abstain from hearing my constitutional challenges out of respect for the University as a state actor. Unfortunately, the…