The former president of Northwestern was dismissed as the first speaker of the Georgetown Act

I'm having a rough week. I was recently forced to write a column expressing skepticism about the prosecution of former FBI Director James Comey for shell art posted on social media, despite being one of his most vocal and vocal critics.

Now, I find myself having to write a column in defense of former Northwestern University President Morton Schapiro, who was recently rejected as Georgetown Law School's commencement speaker. For years I have criticized Schapiro as a major influence in the destruction of intellectual diversity in higher education. The problem with believing in free speech is that you have to believe in free speech even for those whose speech is disgusting. The irony in both cases is compelling. Comey, who implicated President Donald Trump in the baseless investigation into Russian collusion created by the Clinton campaign, is now complaining about the law against him.

Schapiro is less compelling as a victim in the cancellation campaign. While president of Northwestern, Schapiro veered to the left and showed little support for free speech on campus. Schapiro criticized what he called “liberal positions” on speech and endorsed sanctions on speech, including treating speech as a form of attack.

Under Schapiro, most speech is deemed “microaggressive” or intolerable for the purpose of consent and inclusion. He did little to eradicate ideological intolerance in the Northwest and a visible purge of the ranks of conservative or Republican professional intelligence.

Now the crowd has come to Schapiro.

GEORGETOWN LAW STUDENTS SUCCEED IN PROVIDING FIRST-EVER PRO-ISRAEL SPEAKER

He was chosen to speak at the commencement of the law school and soon there was an outcry. A Jewish scholar, Schapiro is considered pro-Israel. He was soon labeled a “Zionist” and an offensive choice by students and faculty.

The petition asked the administration to remove Schapiro, saying “Schapiro is not a lawyer, has no connection to Georgetown, and has controversial, Zionist and dangerous views.”

Yes, previous speakers such as Henry Louis Gates Jr. they were also non-lawyers and unaffiliated with Georgetown, but there were no protests. That was last year.

A HISTORY OF HARVARD'S LEFTIST COMMENCEMENT SPEAKS AMID THE DEBATE OVER THE DEATH OF INTELLIGENCE

Every year, initiation remains a key visual for liberal and Democratic speakers. After graduating most of the participating faculty members in the departments, the universities started the last courses to teach the students about the ideas.

This year's speakers include figures from Nancy Pelosi (Notre Dame de Namur University) to Jamie Raskin (American University and Goucher College) to nominees such as James Talarico (Paul Quinn College). There is no subtlety in their choices or messages. As expected, Pelosi criticized the GOP and Trump while Talarico gave an effective anti-billionaire speech.

Anti-Israel protest at Georgetown University and separatist Iranian rally. (Getty Images)

Schapiro fits within a narrow ideological spectrum of liberal speakers with one notable problem: he supports Israel.

ANTISEMITIC 'Venom' INFLUENCED CAMPUSES GO WORSE AS UNIVERSITIES PLAY 'ROPE-A-DOPE' WITH TRUMP ADMIN: EXPERT

Accordingly, Schapiro was unfairly dismissed and replaced by a Georgetown law professor who opposed investigations into anti-Semitism on campuses.

On the other hand, Schapiro wrote to the leaders of the institution: “I have presided over 28 commencements as president and dean, and those ceremonies are about celebrating graduates and their supporters. I was looking forward to giving a speech about humility and gratitude, but I do not want my presence to interfere with the day's ceremonies. I wish you luck in school.

It was a kind and mature response to a youthful and naive campaign.

MY UNIVERSITY KICKED ME OUT FOR MY VIEWS. NOW PAYING THE PRICE

Sadly, it was a product of the same concession policies that I once criticized Schapiro for empowering at Northwestern.

During the administration, the university left academic integrity and control to the student body. One example I discussed earlier involved a Sociology class taught by Professor Beth Redbird that examined “inequality in American society with an emphasis on race, class, and gender.” Redbird invited both the undocumented individual and a spokesperson for Immigration and Customs Enforcement. It was the kind of balanced discussion we've come to appreciate in higher education, exposing students to very different perspectives and allowing them to consider basic social and political realities.

Various student groups organized protests to prevent their classmates from hearing from the ICE representative. They are greatly assisted by the university itself. While the protesters were shouting “F**k ICE” outside the hall, the Dean of Students appeared and told the students that they would be allowed to enter the classroom if they promised not to disturb it. The university simply asked them to stop shouting and told Redbird that they promised to stay quietly in his classroom.

I AM A RESERVED STUDENT AND NO. 1 QUESTION I GET: 'HOW DO I SURVIVE WITH THE LEFT-SIDED SOLDIER?'

Yes, they immediately canceled the class, the ICE officer had to be removed, and Redbird was forced to cancel his class. What was most shocking was not only Northwestern's inaction (not taking action against students) but also the sense of entitlement at the university that prevents others from speaking out.

The classification of 'Hey, fascist! Hold!' a flyer from the Georgetown John Brown Gun Club (left) and a member of the Georgetown College Republicans (right)

Sophomore April Navarro rejected the idea that faculty should be allowed to invite such speakers into their classrooms to “have a nice, sweet conversation with ICE.” He added, “We're not interested in having those kinds of conversations … we don't engage in those kinds of things; it authorizes ICE violence, it makes Northwestern complicit in this.”

Now, it's Schapiro himself being canceled.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS PROGRAM

In my book Rage and the Republic, I write about how academics and politicians ignore history as they attend to different parties. Democratic leaders like Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer and House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries believe they can ride the wave of outrage back into power. What they don't realize is that these changes eventually “eat their own.” Today's variables become tomorrow's answers.

Schapiro is the latest victim of ideological intolerance in higher education. Of course, his opponents can quote Schapiro himself when he dismisses the argument that he reduces free speech to “slogans or free speech in any form.” It seems that he is now one of the unacceptable costs to be avoided in our academic echo chamber.

CLICK HERE TO LEARN MORE FROM JONATHAN TUREY