Academic freedom does not protect fabrications, any more than the Bill of Rights protects libel or slander.
>Criticism of Churchill, even completely justified criticism, made at
>this moment contributes to his being fired for uttering unpopular
>opinions.
John Lavelle published his exposes of Churchill's plagiarism and fabrication back in the 90s. This is nothing new. The fact that the university and the state tolerated it for so long will work in Churchill's defense.
Churchill is in very little danger here. The CO governor and legislature have made it clear that he is being fired for insulting the 9/11 victims, and that they are looking for any excuse to violate his contract.
In other words, a good lawyer should have no trouble defending Churchill. I think the worst that will happen to Churchill is that he takes early retirement and a six figure parting gift from the CO taxpayers. He may well keep his job.
Save your energy for the folks who get fired without compensation, or even jailed. That is where free speech is under attack. Churchill put himself in this situation, he's thriving on it, and he is very unlikely to get hurt by it.