The University of Pennsylvania has suspended law professor Amy Wax for the 2025-2026 academic year, citing concerns over her conduct.

The Ivy League school's decision has drawn significant attention due to Wax’s high-profile controversies surrounding her statements on race and immigration, and her suspension will result in a pay reduction, loss of her named chair, and permanent cuts to her summer compensation, as Just the News reports.

Wax’s conduct, not her conservative ideology, was the university’s stated reason for the disciplinary action. The university emphasized that her behavior, including alleged unprofessionalism, was the core issue behind the decision.  This move comes after years of controversy involving Wax, particularly remarks about the academic performance of Black students.

Wax Loses Summer Pay, Named Chair

In addition to her suspension, Wax will also lose half of her pay for the 2025-2026 academic year, and all of her summer compensation has been revoked indefinitely. She has also been stripped of her prestigious named chair in the law school. Furthermore, Wax is required to clarify during public appearances that she is not representing the University of Pennsylvania or its law school.

The sanctions are the latest chapter in an ongoing series of conflicts between Wax and the university. Accusations of not offering equal opportunities to students have surrounded Wax for years, igniting debates over academic freedom and fairness in education.

Sanctions Follow Years of Controversy

The issues with Wax date back to 2018, when she was barred from teaching first-year law students after making controversial comments. At the time, Wax stated that Black students underperformed academically compared to other racial groups. These comments led to a petition from students, which resulted in her initial sanctions.

Wax’s suspension comes as part of the university's broader efforts to address what it sees as her ongoing pattern of problematic behavior. Provost John Jackson publicly reprimanded Wax, accusing her of "flagrantly unprofessional and targeted disparagement" of both individuals and groups.

Faculty Senate Supports Decision

The University of Pennsylvania's Faculty Senate, along with its academic freedom committee, supported the suspension, stating that the sanctions were procedurally correct. The Faculty Hearing Board found that Wax violated the institution’s behavioral standards, leading to the disciplinary actions now in place.

Provost Jackson also hinted that Wax could face further consequences, including potential termination, should her conduct continue in the same vein. Despite the university’s statements, there is speculation that Wax may file a lawsuit in response to the sanctions.

Possibility of Legal Action Looms

David Shapiro, Wax’s attorney, has criticized the university, suggesting a double standard in how it enforces its policies. He highlighted what he sees as a contradiction between Wax’s treatment and the university’s handling of other controversial speakers and faculty. “If you are a Jew-hating and Israel-bashing propagandist, you can say anything,” Shapiro remarked, accusing Penn of inconsistency in its commitment to free speech.

Others have expressed similar concerns. The Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE) warned that Penn’s actions against Wax could set a dangerous precedent for academic freedom across the nation. Alex Morey, FIRE's vice president, suggested that other faculty members might now face similar consequences for their speech, even if unrelated to classroom performance.

Historical Precedents and Possible Retirement

Wax’s case has drawn comparisons to other instances where conservative professors have faced institutional penalties for controversial statements. Georgetown Law, for example, dismissed a professor for making remarks similar to those attributed to Wax about the academic performance of Black students.

Amid these developments, some observers believe that Penn might be attempting to pressure Wax into retirement. Richard Vedder, an academic known for his commentary on higher education, speculated that the university’s actions may be partially motivated by Wax’s status as a septuagenarian and cancer survivor. Such speculation underscores the complexities of Wax’s situation, where age, health, and politics intersect.

Possible Path Forward for Wax

In light of the escalating situation, there is growing speculation that Wax may take legal action against the University of Pennsylvania. Some experts, such as Princeton political scientist Robert George, have expressed confidence that Wax could prevail in court. “I have no doubt,” George remarked, noting that her previous discussions about legal challenges suggest that she is willing to pursue litigation if necessary.

Former Trump administration official Adam Kissel echoed this sentiment, adding that the chances of Wax filing a lawsuit are high. Given the history of legal battles between universities and faculty over similar issues, Wax's potential lawsuit could reignite debates over academic freedom and institutional authority.

Public Reactions to the Suspension

Wax’s suspension has polarized opinions both within and outside the academic community. Supporters of the university’s decision argue that Wax’s conduct violated the principles of fairness and equality expected in an academic environment. However, free speech advocates have warned that the university’s actions could have far-reaching consequences for academic freedom across the nation.

As Wax’s suspension looms for the 2025-2026 academic year, her next steps remain uncertain. Whether she chooses to retire, take legal action, or attempt to return to teaching at Penn, her case is sure to continue generating debate.

Long-Term Impact on Penn and Academia

The controversy surrounding Wax’s suspension raises important questions about the boundaries of academic freedom and the role of universities in regulating faculty conduct. Penn’s handling of the case has drawn both praise and criticism, leaving the academic world divided.

Regardless of the outcome, Wax’s case will likely have lasting implications for how universities balance free speech with the need to ensure equal treatment for all students. As the situation unfolds, the broader conversation around academic freedom and institutional responsibility will undoubtedly continue to evolve.