Image 01 Image 03

Supreme Court rejects Ward Churchill’s appeal

Supreme Court rejects Ward Churchill’s appeal

It appears that, for the time being, plagiarism can still get you fired, as in the case of former University of Colorado Professor Ward Churchill. The Supreme Court today rejected Ward Churchill’s appeal without comment, leading the University of Colorado to declare today a “victory for CU faculty.”

Churchill first came under fire from the university and many Americans for his essay stating that some victims of 9/11 were “little Eichmanns.” While the university determined his comments were protected under the First Amendment, a 20-member faculty board voted unanimously to fire Churchill for multiple counts of plagiarism, which led to this case before the Supreme Court.

The University of Colorado’s Office of the President posted a statement on its facebook page regarding the case:

Statement on today’s U.S. Supreme Court denial of a Ward Churchill appeal from CU Board of Regents Chair Michael Carrigan: “When Churchill’s comments about 9/11 first surfaced in 2005, the Board of Regents called for Churchill’s free speech rights to be protected, and Chancellor DiStefano correctly determined that no one should punish him for exercising his right to free speech. At the same time, however, it was the Board of Regents’ obligation to uphold the unanimous verdict of more than 20 faculty members who concluded that Churchill’s scholarship was illegitimate and prevent him from teaching on a University of Colorado campus. We take that obligation seriously, and today’s decision is a victory for CU faculty.”

Let Fareed Zakaria take note: while CNN and Time Magazine may not have fired you, there are still some corners of the United States where plagiarism is unacceptable.

See also this excellent background on Churchill and his defenders’ 12 excuses for plagiarism.


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


TrooperJohnSmith | April 1, 2013 at 3:45 pm

Look for his fellow traveler Lizzy “Liawatha” Warren to invite him for some pow-wow chow and perhaps a toke around on the peace pipe, as they try to find a suitable NGO or other “no-show” job for him. Maybe Bill Ayers can hook a brother up with something!

I’ve so had it with “white Indians” giving the real ones a bad name. 😆

“…there are still some corners of the United States where plagiarism is unacceptable.”

He could replace Sherf “Shotgun” Joe Biden. He has pretty much the same academic chops…

And both are anti-American idiots.

It appears that pretending to be an American Indian will only get you so far. Perhaps if Ward Churchill had been a woman from Massachusetts, he could have gotten away with it.

Plagiarism should be treated as theft of intellectual property which in turn should be a criminal offense.

At least the supremes allowed for a just conclusion of this episode and hopefully this will serve notice to others that such theft is not acceptable but it won’t…

His greatest contribution was showing porn flicks in the chow hall in Viet Nam. He was the inspiration for the GI Joe kung fu grip!

As I’m from Colo maybe he can now run for senate. Given the trail broken by Lizzie. Oh wait, we already have the seats filled by fully qualified lefty liar dem frauds! Sorry Ward Hizzypisser.

I remember the incident and furor but not the details. On the surface, the entire matter speaks volumes and leaves several interesting questions unanswered, doesn’t it. Did the faculty really need an investigation to know whether the essay was an act of free speech? Was the righteous nobility at CU only concerned about plagiarism after the negative publicity surrounding the 9/11 essay (with which a good number probably agreed, no doubt)? The plagiarism sounds like a hole card they were afraid to play (such conviction), until this opportunity presented itself. It’s always good to have a “plan B” in your back pocket.

Do the Supremes vote on these decisions? Wouldn’t it be fun to know if there were any dissents? And who?

Thanks for the link to the “12 Excuses for Plagarism”. For some strange reason (sarcasm) the mainstream news media didn’t make much effort to report the details. Hence the ordinary reader, with little free time, remained uninformed about the facts.

Too bad Ward isn’t a law professor; he could take Lieawatha’s former job as Harvard has an opening for a fake Indian. With high cheekbones, that is.

[…] referred to 9/11 victims as  ”little Eichmans.”  His attorney says Churchill’s First Amendment rights have been attacked, which equates to […]