LEXINGTON — A University of Kentucky law professor who was removed from his teaching duties after posting an online petition calling for military action against Israel appeared in federal court Friday as a judge weighs allowing him to return to the classroom.  Ramsi Woodcock, the professor, file d the lawsuit in November, seeking to be returned to his teaching duties as a full-time tenured professor. His suit also challenges the use of a widespread but controversial definition of antisemitism in in university disciplinary actions and by the federal government. The definition was adopted by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s (IHRA) in 2016. UK administrators said they reassigned Woodcock from his teaching duties and began an investigation into his conduct last summer after learning of an online petition he circulated that called for military action against Israel. He was also barred from entering the UK College of Law building on the Lexington campus.  U.S. District Judge Danny Reeves, who was appointed to the bench by President George W. Bush, heard testimony from Woodcock and two other UK employees.  The immediate question before the judge is whether to return Woodcock to teaching next month when a new semester begins. Reeves said he became “more skeptical” after continuing to hear questions from Woodcock’s attorneys. At one point, the judge said Woodcock’s lawyers “haven’t shown me a nickel’s worth of harm” that has occurred to Woodcock amid his removal from the classroom. UK is continuing to pay Woodcock his salary and benefits. After the hearing concluded, Woodcock said he was glad to have a chance to “tell my story” in court.  UK spokesman Jay Blanton said in a statement to the Kentucky Lantern that Reeves had been “well prepared and asked thoughtful questions” throughout the hearing.  “We were pleased to defend the university’s decisions to investigate Professor Woodcock and to reassign him during the investigations,” Blanton added. UK is hoping to dismiss the case entirely. In documents it filed, the university said its investigation into accusations against Woodcock is still ongoing and it may take action in the matter in the future, whether it be returning him to the classroom or disciplinary action.  UK sent Woodcock a notice of investigation in July after the administration became aware of the online petition and was told Woodcock spoke about genocide in Gaza at an academic conference and during another university’s panel discussion. Additionally, the letter alleged Woodcock “spammed” Listservs “with your personal viewpoints concerning the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.” The letter says four professors who said they heard him speak at academic conferences or were on the Listservs reported the statements.  Later, UK sent an amended letter in September saying that four students “some of whom are Jewish” also notified UK that Woodcock in his official capacity was calling “for violence against Israel, the genocide of Israeli people who are predominantly Jewish, and the ultimate destruction of Israel.” One report alleged Woodcock made “anti-Semitic and anti-Israeli remarks during an optional lecture,” while another said he shouted “Free Palestine” while in a car with UK law students. Kentucky professor’s lawsuit challenges Trump administration’s definition of antisemitism Reeves asked if Woodcock had impeded the investigation by not cooperating with the university’s appointed investigator, Farnaz Farkish Thompson, a partner of McGuire Woods based in Richmond, Virginia.  Woodcock was questioned by both sides about returning a university-issued laptop to UK amid the investigation. He said that he had not used the laptop for a few years because of technology issues with it and instead used a personal computer for academic work. When the university asked for the laptop back, he realized some personal files related to his family were on the device, and he wanted further clarification on the privacy of those files.  Another issue raised during the hearing was Woodcock and his attorneys not responding to 40-some written questions posed by Thompson earlier this month. Bryan Beauman, one of UK’s attorneys, said that most of the questions posed by Woodcock’s counsel to him were similar to questions Thompson had asked.  However, Woodcock’s attorneys have raised concerns about the ability of Thompson to be an unbiased investigator, and said so in a letter to her, as she was listed as a contributor to Project 2025, which was created as a guiding document for the Trump administration leading up to the 2024 presidential election. Among its goals for the U.S. presidency, the document calls for supporting Israel.  Woodcock’s attorneys also called two witnesses to testify, the interim dean of the College of Law, James Duff, and Sarah Mudd, the executive director of the Office of Equal Opportunity and Title IX Coordinator at UK.  Mudd’s testimony largely focused on when she learned of the investigation and its process. Duff became the interim dean of the college on July 1, shortly before UK announced its investigation of Woodcock.  In answering questions from one of Woodcock’s attorneys, Gadeir Abbas of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) Legal Defense Fund, Duff said it was “for Woodcock’s and students’ benefit” that administrators barred Woodcock from the law building pending the investigation, in case the allegations against him were proven true. Duff also said it was a “collaborative process” to begin the investigation into Woodcock, involving the university’s general counsel, Provost Robert DiPaola and President Eli Capilouto.  Besides the immediate question of returning Woodcock to classes for the spring semester, the lawsuit questions the use of the IHRA’s definition of antisemitism in university policies and laws.  Under a Kentucky resolution enacted by the legislature and signed by Gov. Andy Beshear earlier this year, Kentucky’s public universities and colleges must employ the IHRA definition by January in policies “to combat antisemitism.”  Woodcock is also asking Reeves to order U.S. Secretary of Education Linda McMahon “to refrain from requiring or using the IHRA definition of antisemitism in enforcing Title VI.” Title VI of the 1964 Civil Rights Act prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color or national origin as a condition of receiving federal funding. Critics, including the American Civil Liberties Union, say the definition conflates antisemitism with criticism of Israel, leading to unconstitutional violations of free speech rights. The definition’s author has said it should not be used to “sacrifice free speech.” Ahead of Friday’s hearing, Republican Attorney General Russell Coleman’s office filed a motion to intervene in the case on behalf of the state to defend the new law on antisemitism and higher education. Lexington attorney Joe Childers is representing Woodcock whose case is supported by the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression’s (FIRE) Faculty Legal Defense Fund. Also representing Woodcock are the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) and Chicago-based law firm Kapitan Gomaa Law. The post US judge must decide if Kentucky professor can return to teaching after criticizing Israel appeared first on The Lexington Times. ...read more read less