Trapper's Swamp

I was alerted to this news when our (sadly) former NMP Siew Kum Hong sent this tweet, which was picked up quickly by friends on Twitter. This article from Above The Law broke the news, and also has the official NYU statement on the decision, made by Dr Thio and not the NYU administration. The New York Times has also picked up the news here.

In NYU's official statement, dean Richard Revesz revealed that neither he, his colleagues in NYU Law and those sitting on the NYU Global Appointments Committee were aware of Dr Thio's impassioned speech against the repeal of Section 377A in Singapore. "Consistent with the norms of the legal academy," said Revesz, "we generally limit our inquiry to the review of academic publications and works in progress, teaching evaluations, and reputation for collegiality."

But that was not all:

The position taken in the speech should have been irrelevant to our evaluation of Professor Thio, although the argumentation supporting the position might properly have played a role in that evaluation.

Professor Thio's position in that speech is inimical to the Law School's position against discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. Nonetheless, I do not believe that Professor Thio's opposition to our institutional position should have played any role in our evaluation of her. Leading academic institutions benefit greatly from a diversity of perspectives, not from hiring only people who share the same views.

At the same time, our evaluation of Professor Thio's strength as a scholar might have been usefully informed by an assessment of the analytic cogency and methodological integrity of the arguments and evidence she marshaled for her position. It would be up to the individual faculty member to determine what, if any, weight to give to the speech to Parliament in judging her as a scholar.

(Emphasis mine)

In other words, "her opinions will not stop us from inviting her, but if we know that speech is all she can muster up arguing for her stand, we might not have invited her". Nice guy, Dean Revesz.

In any case, this outcome appeared inevitable given the amount of bad press her visit have attracted. Her classes were undersubscribed, the students have raised nearly 800 signatories on a petition protesting her invitation, and her failure to convey strong analytic cogency and methodological integrity1, instead choosing victimhood as a weak defense, all culminated in her pullin' a Palin.2

Her ideas and convictions may not have failed her, but her disregard for the academic values that she claims to value, fuelled by blind faith, was exposed to another country today. NYU students have overwhelmingly shown that her ideology is not welcome nor accepted. When will we, as a country, finally catch up to the NYU student body and reject that discriminatory mindset?

1 Schadenfreude overtook me here. I'm enjoying this a little too much.

2 Been waiting to pull this one out of the hat. Thanks Dr Thio!