Bronwyn Eyre: How USask tried to ruin a man's career for questioning critical race theory - National Post
University of Saskatchewan housing, signage, logo, November 4, 2015. Photo by GordWaldner/Saskatoon StarPhoenixArticle contentThis legal saga, which embroiled a university bureaucracy and now hangs on a decision in court, is one that should serve as a lesson — and a warning — to all Canadians interested in free speech. It’s the story of one student, but it could be any student at any North American university. Tim Haggstrom could be your son. His experience is a cautionary tale to anyone who challenges the system, whose underlying message is very clear: Don’t try.
In the fall of 2023, Haggstrom, then a law student, was formally censured by the University of Saskatchewan for “harassment,” after he challenged critical race theory in open letters to faculty and peers. He appealed the administrative decision and lost. He then filed a judicial review and constitutional challenge with the Saskatchewan Court of King’s Bench. In May, the court heard the university’s motion to dismiss his case. A decision will be released any day.
Columnist Jesse Kline keeps you up to date with what’s happening in Israel and the effects of antisemitism on life here in Canada. Friday mornings.
A welcome email is on its way. If you don't see it, please check your junk folder.
The next issue of Channel Israel will soon be in your inbox.
We encountered an issue signing you up. Please try again
Haggstrom was in his third and final year when, following an academic exchange, he returned to the University of Saskatchewan to hear rumblings of a great controversy. Law students had learned that up to one-third of their peers were being allotted extra time on exams.
The university’s official position, including when I attended back in the 1990s, has always been that extra time levels the playing field. Keep in mind, however, that many law exams account for 100 per cent of a student’s grade. Timing, and properly managing it, is critical to this high-pressure, competitive exercise.
In this case, concerned students asked the Law Students’ Association (LSA) to broach the issue. There was no substantial discussion at the next meeting, and the agenda item was simply listed in the minutes on the association’s Facebook page.
It was then that other students, who had been silent during the meeting, took to the comments section, saying that it was racist to even raise the issue of extra time because it’s commonly allocated to students who self-declare as Indigenous.
Haggstrom was then-student president of the Runnymede Society, whose purpose — ironically — is to foster debate. He reached out to peers. “There appeared to be no interest in resolving misunderstandings,” he said in a phone interview this month.
“Many interpreted the situation through the prism of ‘race scholarship’ and critical race theory (CRT). According to CRT, you can’t question a claim of subjective harm made by a member of a racialized group.”
Quoting John Stuart Mill, John Locke and Nelson Mandela, Haggstrom penned a letter to peers, writing that “courageous discourse does not run from irritation or offence.” At the next Law Students’ Association meeting, he asked to read the letter aloud, then posted it on the association’s Facebook page.
It was quickly removed. And that was the end of the discourse.
Within days, a classmate, subsequently joined by 15 others, filed a harassment complaint against Haggstrom under the university’s misconduct policy, citing the “harm” caused by his letters. Astoundingly, while the university could have pursued a mediated discussion and informal resolution, it opted instead for a formal disciplinary hearing, which took place on Aug. 23, 2023.
