The University of Michigan’s Senate Advisory Committee on University Affairs met Monday afternoon in the Alexander G. Ruthven Building to discuss a faculty member facing backlash for social media comments made about Charlie Kirk’s death, the related statement made by interim University President Domenico Grasso, committee charges — documents that list the tasks and responsibilities of a committee — and the next Senate Assembly Meeting.
SACUA Chair Derek Peterson began the meeting with an update on the Presidential Search Committee and the SACUA vacancy process to fill Alex Yaha Yi’s former seat. During Last Monday’s meeting, the assembly discussed the resolution on the Presidential Search Committee, which expressed faculty’s desire to be included in the committee in the search process. Luke McCarthy, director of the Faculty Senate Office, also explained the initiation of the SACUA vacancy process to fill the current vacant spot.
“The resolution concerning the Presidential Search Committee was adopted yesterday in our last week (meeting) and will be stipulated and considered at the next Senate Assembly meeting,” Peterson said. “Senate Assembly members have been informed about the SACUA vacancy courtesy of Luke having sent that to email last week asking for nominations.”
Peterson continued with a discussion about a School of Education faculty member who made controversial comments on social media regarding the death of Charlie Kirk, right-wing political commentator and founder of Turning Point USA.
“Since that time, this colleague has been the subject of considerable attention from online and other real-life politicians who wish to call for his resignation, and who have outed him on social media,” Peterson said. “He’s been the subject of doxxing and calls for retribution.”
Peterson praised Grasso for his reaction in response to the social media backlash and his commitment to academic freedom. He proposed passing a resolution to thank him.
“(Grasso) has not rebuked our colleague, he made a statement over the weekend affirming his commitment to academic freedom,” Peterson said. “Other universities have caved in to pressure of this kind in the wake of the murder of Charlie Kirk. I think we have to pass a brief resolution thanking President Grasso for his commitment to the First Amendment and academic freedom, recognizing that he is under a lot of pressure from external brokers.”
Faculty debated whether SACUA should pass an open resolution on this matter or make a private statement. Kentaro Toyama, School of Information professor, questioned the intent behind making the resolution public.
“The reason I ask is because the statement in question is in a grayish area, at least for me, because it appears to be supporting political violence,” Toyama said. “However, I do think that the president is making the right decision and so I would like to support and just say thank you for supporting (the faculty member’s) right to say what they want as a citizen, and not taking, intellectually, the same pressure.”
Education professor Vilma Mesa also expressed concern about releasing a public resolution.
“I am not ready to think that we should do a public statement,” Mesa said. “I think there’s a lot of things at stake and I don’t think that we should be targets for more attention.”
With members failing to reach a conclusion about releasing a public-facing resolution, Peterson decided to send the message to Grasso privately and continued with the meeting.
The meeting resumed with a discussion of committee charges. Peterson addressed the need to issue committee charges so that respective committee chairs can plan out their initiatives. SACUA must approve the responsibilities written in the charge documents so that they can be voted on next week at the Assembly.
“Some of these committees are advisory to vice presidents,” Peterson said. “Others are purely for projects or concerns or issues that pertain to the governance of the faculty. All of them do important work. The committees, I think, we should look at together… are the Academic Affairs Advisory Committee, the General Council Advisory Committee and probably the (Research Advisory Committee).”
After a discussion about prioritizing certain charges, they reviewed the documents for each of the three committees and unanimously agreed to send them onwards to the Senate Assembly.
The meeting concluded with a brief discussion on the next Senate Assembly meeting planned for Sept. 22, with the purpose of introducing new faculty members to the Assembly and voting on the committee charges, which SACUA will endorse.
The Assembly also briefly discussed potentially including surveillance as a special item at the Assembly meeting and of Graduate Student Research Assistant unionizing.
Daily Staff Reporter Savannah Halpern can be reached at savhal@umich.edu.
The post SACUA discusses committee charges and the next Senate Assembly Meeting appeared first on The Michigan Daily.
Leave a Reply