Appeals court says judge was wrong to pause University of Kentucky professor lawsuit over anti-Israel speech

Jesse Fraga, Lexington Herald-Leader on Aug 26, 2026

By clicking submit, I authorize Arcamax and its affiliates to: (1) use, sell, and share my information for marketing purposes, including cross-context behavioral advertising, as described in our Privacy Policy , (2) add to information that I provide with other information like interests inferred from web page views, or data lawfully obtained from data brokers, such as past purchase or location data, or publicly available data, (3) contact me or enable others to contact me by email or other means with offers for different types of goods and services, and (4) retain my information while I am engaging with marketing messages that I receive and for a reasonable amount of time thereafter. I understand I can opt out at any time through an email that I receive, or by clicking here

A federal appeals court on Monday asked a lower court to reconsider a lawsuit from a professor that alleged the University of Kentucky violated his freedom of speech.

Ramsi Woodcock, a UK law professor, is suing UK after he was barred from teaching in July 2025 because he created a petition calling for violence against Israel. The university said he created “a hostile environment for Jewish members of the university community.”

The university opened an investigation into Woodcock’s statements against Israel and barred him from teaching on July 18, 2025, at least until their investigation was complete.

Woodcock is still not permitted to teach.

Woodcock sued UK in federal court over what he considered a wrongful investigation and job suspension, but the university argued the court should stay out of the campus’ “internal disciplinary process,” court records show. Judge Danny C. Reeves agreed to pause the case and would reconsider it once UK’s investigation was complete.

But the U.S. Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals says the federal court wrongfully abstained from hearing the case, and should do so now.

The university claimed its investigation into Woodcock was a “formalized, ongoing proceeding,” which should allow the court to step back from the lawsuit, according to the appeals court. But the university’s argument was moot because the university hasn’t filed a lawsuit or formal complaint against Woodcock, and its investigation into his actions is in a “preliminary” stage, the appeals court said in online records.

“Indeed, the University has not even made a threshold determination that Woodcock violated one of its policies…,” the appeals court said. “... The university is still determining whether a formal hearing will be necessary.”

The U.S. District Court is expected to reconsider Woodcock’s motion for a preliminary injunction that could allow him to return to teaching. Woodcock also wants a judge to rule that the university can’t rely on the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s definition of antisemitism in disciplinary hearings, among other requests.

The university has discrimination policies, which define antisemitism as “a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews. Rhetorical and physical manifestations of antisemitism are directed toward Jewish or non-Jewish individuals and/or their property, toward Jewish community institutions and religious facilities.”

Woodcock is asking the court to make a distinction between being anti-Israel and being antisemitic, he told the Herald-Leader. With this, he may not be found liable for breaking the university’s anti-discrimination policy, which prohibits antisemitism, or hatred toward Jewish people.

Woodcock is also suing UK in Franklin Circuit Court over its hiring of the new law school dean, Gregory Van Tatenhove. An attempt at an injunction to prevent Van Tatenhove from starting in his role failed, and the new dean started prior to the beginning of the fall semester.