Two years ago, Princeton classics professor Joshua Katz wrote an inflammatory essay in Quillette criticizing the idiotic letter from many of his colleagues proposing a massive violation of academic freedom for the sake of "anti-racism."  His essay offended many people at Princeton, resulting in serial denunciations, including by the President Christopher Eisgruber.  Now the University is moving to fire Katz, it claims for a previous relationship with a former student for which the university had already sanctioned him earlier (a one year suspension without pay).  (Note that the University itself agreed it was consensual and exonerated Katz from allegations of sexual harassment.)  

This case will end up in court, and when it does I suspect it will emerge that many Princeton faculty who had consensual relationships with students were not sanctioned, let alone terminated, which will raise the question "why Katz?"  The answer, pretty obviously, is that he is being punished for his lawful speech.  In this regard, the whole case is reminiscent of what happened to Ward Churchill at the University of Colorado at Boulder (offensive speech about 9/11 led to an investigation of his entire career, and "discovery" of academic misconduct, although the faculty panel reviewing the case did not recommend dismissal).

Unless the University produces in court evidence of more serious sexual misconduct than has been revealed so far, this whole case will be an enormous stain on Princeton's purported commitment to the "Chicago Principles" and to academic freedom generally.