By Shawn Fleetwood  |  The Federalist

The U.S. Naval Academy has postponed a previously scheduled lecture featuring a New York University professor who’s regularly referred to former President Donald Trump as an “authoritarian,” The Federalist has learned.

First unearthed by The Daily Signal, the Naval Academy invited NYU Professor Ruth Ben-Ghiat to give a keynote address at its annual Bancroft Lecture on Oct. 10, according to a Sept. 4 Substack post by the Trump-hating academic.

The school’s history department previously established the lecture series to “honor the academy’s founder, George Bancroft” and provide Midshipmen, school faculty, and others an opportunity to hear from “eminent historians … about their research and the relevance of [their] craft to today’s world.”

As noted by The Daily Signal, Ben-Ghiat indicated plans to give “a partisan screed” attacking Trump “in the midst of a hotly contested presidential campaign.” In her post announcing her upcoming speech, the left-wing NYU professor signaled an intent to tie Trump to authoritarianism.

“I will be speaking about what happens to militaries under authoritarian rule, touching on Fascist Italy, Pinochet’s Chile and the Russian military during the war on Ukraine,” she wrote. “That brings us to today’s post, on why Donald Trump insults the military.”

Ben-Ghiat further criticized Trump for his August visit to Arlington National Cemetery at the request of Gold Star families whose loved ones were killed during President Joe Biden’s disastrous 2021 Afghanistan withdrawal. She also outlandishly claimed that “insulting and mocking the military are among [Trump’s] most consistent habits,” regurgitated Democrats’ debunked “suckers” and “losers” hoax, and claimed Trump has an “authoritarian character” and “desire to destroy democratic values and ideals.”

In a statement provided to The Federalist, a representative for the Naval Academy’s media relations division revealed that the school’s Bancroft Memorial Lecture series “is currently postponed” and said that the academy looks forward “to continuing our tradition of facilitating academic discussions centered on open, honest, and relevant topics for our students.”

“The Naval Academy encourages Midshipmen to be critical thinkers who can analyze issues from multiple perspectives and contexts. Our focus is on how to think, not what to think,” the official said.

The representative revealed that event speakers are “selected by a committee of faculty members in the History Department and approved by the provost and superintendent.” The “chief criterion for selection,” the official said, is that the individual must have a “distinguished body of published historical scholarship characterized by the highest standard of research.”

“The personal thoughts and political opinions of guest speakers do not reflect those of the Naval Academy staff or Midshipmen,” the official added.

The decision to postpone the lecture was “made by leadership,” and a rescheduled date has yet to be determined, according to the representative.

After she was invited to speak, Ben-Ghiat reportedly claimed that her speech at the Bancroft Lecture would “have no mention of contemporary USA or former President Trump,” as doing so “would not be appropriate,” according to The Daily Caller.

History of Republican-Hating Rhetoric

Ben-Ghiat’s Sept. 4 screed is hardly the only example in which she has painted Trump and Republicans as existential threats to “democracy.”

In a March 2023 MSNBC column, the authoritarianism “expert” expressed concern that Democrats’ unprecedented and dangerous lawfare against Trump could be used by the former president to bolster his reelection chances and weaponize government institutions to go after his political opponents. In other words, she’s scared Trump will use the same lawfare tactics against Democrats they’ve been using against him for years.

“Like other strongmen, he will focus on gaining control of public institutions to exact revenge. This is one meaning of his declaration at CPAC that ‘we’re going to finish what we started’ and his styling of himself as a ‘warrior,’” Ben-Ghiat wrote. “That means punishing all who did not collaborate with his attempt to overthrow the government and completing his capture of the judiciary so he can attain the strongman’s dream: being above prosecution altogether.”

In August 2023, the NYU professor claimed in a tweet that former Attorney General Bill Barr is a “far-right Catholic” and “not a friend to democracy” and asserted that he previously gave “racist to the core” speeches to members of law enforcement. That post was in response to legal analysis Barr gave on Fox News about Special Counsel Jack Smith indicting Trump over his speech contesting the 2020 election results.

Days after the 2022 midterm elections, Ben-Giatt penned an MSNBC article arguing that Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis has “authoritarian sympathies and attitudes” and offers a “more ‘respectable’-seeming version of illiberal rule than the baggage-laden outrage specialist that is Trump.” She bizarrely scaremongered that the GOP governor would “continue Trump’s relentless attempts to turn back the clock on social progress in America by silencing and disenfranchising tens of millions who don’t fit into Republicans’ white Christian vision for the nation.”

She also previously accused X owner Elon Musk of being a “fascist.”

Legal Issues on the Horizon?

The Naval Academy’s decision to invite Ben-Ghiat is raising questions among legal specialists and lawmakers about whether the school is abiding by Pentagon guidance governing military members’ political conduct.

In their Daily Signal report, The Heritage Foundation’s Hans von Spakovsky and Cully Stimson argued that by inviting Ben-Ghiat to speak at the Bancroft Lecture, the Naval Academy is “violating Defense Department directives prohibiting the military from engaging in partisan political activity.”

“Department of Defense Directive No. 1344.10 (Feb. 19, 2008) bans active members of the military, which includes the naval officers who are administrators and teachers at the academy, from engaging in ‘partisan political activities,’” they wrote. “By putting the academy’s official imprimatur on this rancorous harangue, the academy is doing exactly what the directive says it[] shouldn’t do: ‘appear to imply official sponsorship, approval, or endorsement’ of what is patently a partisan, political speech.”

[READ: 30-Year Naval Academy Teacher Details Depth Of DEI Rot In America’s Military Institutions]

Rep. Keith Self, R-Texas, expressed similar concerns in an Oct. 3 letter to Naval Academy Superintendent Yvette M. Davids. The congressman noted that the school’s intended role is to “foster leadership and integrity, not to subject future officers to indoctrination” and asked Davids to rescind Ben-Ghiat’s invitation to speak at this week’s lecture.

“Our service academies are not arenas for political debate; they are publicly funded institutions charged with training future military leaders to serve under any administration,” Self wrote. “Engaging in partisan discourse at such a critical moment undermines the academy’s mission and is an utter disservice to our midshipmen and the principles upon which the Naval Academy was founded.”

When pressed on whether the Naval Academy believes its inviting Ben-Ghiat to speak at the Bancroft Lecture violates the aforementioned Pentagon guidelines, a school representative said the academy “maintains a high moral, legal, and ethical bar in remaining a strictly non-partisan training and educational institution,” and that this “includes avoiding all appearances of association of partisan political advocacy or endorsement in adherence with civil-military norms and Department of Defense Instruction 1344.10.”

_
Shawn Fleetwood is a staff writer for The Federalist and a graduate of the University of Mary Washington. He previously served as a state content writer for Convention of States Action and his work has been featured in numerous outlets, including RealClearPolitics, RealClearHealth, and Conservative Review. Follow him on Twitter @ShawnFleetwood

First published in The Federalist