In response to Anthony’s post, you’ll note that I did not call for the university to take any action against Professor Pino. I did make the point that the “free speech” defense — in this instance — may not be valid. If a government employee has confessed to involvement in a website that actually provides “training materials” in support of active combatants against the U.S., I think it is incumbent upon the government agency in question to — at the very least — see if state resources were used in the effort. It may very well be that professor Pino engaged in nothing more than grotesque (but constitutionally-protected) free speech. It may be that he did more. It is hardly chilling free speech rights to determine whether a government employee used government resources for potentially criminal purposes. Kent State’s immediate academic freedom defense was premature.