Tenured professor Ramsi Woodcock has filed a federal lawsuit against the University of Kentucky and individuals involved in his removal from responsibilities and the investigation into his criticism of Israel.
Filed on Thursday, Nov. 13, the lawsuit alleges Woodcock’s First Amendment right to free expression, as well as UK regulations, were violated.
The lawsuit requests an injunction ordering UK administrators to act in their official capacities to reinstate and end the investigation into Woodcock.
UK spokesperson Jay Blanton said the university will be limited in its comments, as the investigation into Woodcock is ongoing.
The university reassigned and launched an investigation against Woodcock, a professor at UK’s J. David Rosenberg College of Law, this summer, according to previous coverage by the Kentucky Kernel.
UK President Eli Capilouto announced the investigation to the campus community through a campus-wide email on July 18, stating that an “unnamed university employee,” later revealed to be Woodcock, had circulated a petition that could be interpreted as antisemitic in accordance with state and federal guidance.
The email said the petition called “for the destruction of a people based on national origin.”
The lawsuit claims these actions were taken against Woodcock because he spoke out in opposition to “Israeli colonialism, apartheid and genocide” in Palestine on numerous instances, including the petition he posted on his website in November 2024.
The petition demanded “the world make war on Israel immediately” due to “the duty of states to liberate Palestine by force of arms.”
Blanton said the university’s view of academic freedom is that faculty members have the right to express their views on their research and scholarship within their area of expertise.
“That right, however, doesn’t extend to creating a hostile environment for people,” Blanton said. “That is the question that has been raised.”
Despite Woodcock posting the initial petition in November 2024 and having openly expressed his views since February 2024, the lawsuit said UK didn’t consider his conduct “suspendable offenses” until July 2025.
Woodcock said he had presented a paper on the dismantling of Israel at a faculty research seminar in February 2024, and then sent the abstract portion of the paper to a faculty listserv monitored by the university.
“It’s mystifying to me that the university would suddenly suspend me in the summer of 2025 when I had been saying all this stuff for more than a year,” Woodcock said.
UK’s actions came after Kentucky adopted Senate Joint Resolution 55 in April 2025, a law that “imposes on public universities in Kentucky the IHRA (International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance) definition of antisemitism,” according to the lawsuit.
Challenging IHRA’s definition of antisemitism, the lawsuit said it extends to “at least three categories of non-discriminatory political speech,” including “denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination, e.g., by claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavor.”
The lawsuit asks for a declaration that the IHRA definition of antisemitism violates the First Amendment and that UK cannot rely on the definition in disciplinary proceedings.
One of the drafters of the definition, Kenneth Stern, has stated that the IHRA working definition of antisemitism was “never intended to be used to determine whether speech should be disciplined,” according to the lawsuit.
While the university has not suspended Woodcock, he said his reassignment is “functionally” a suspension and he was banned from entering UK’s College of Law.
“You’re not allowed to teach, you’re not allowed to research, you’re not allowed to do service, and, you know, voila, it’s the same thing as a suspension,” Woodcock said.
UK’s administrative regulation 3:8 states full-time faculty employees must “have comparable total effort, although individual distributions of teaching, research, and service may vary.”
The lawsuit alleges Woodcock’s reassigned workload is not in alignment with AR 3:8’s definition of a “full load equivalent.” Instead, his reassignment has not included any teaching, research or service and he was assigned to “professional development,” according to the lawsuit.
“You have 100% professional development, which is basically an amorphous, semi-defined category, but it isn’t teaching, research or service,” Woodcock said.
Blanton said Woodcock’s reassignment was appropriate and consistent with institutional norms and past practices.
“Professor Woodcock was not suspended. He was not fired,” Blanton said. “He was reassigned while the investigation is ongoing.”
The lawsuit also requests monetary damages for emotional distress, reputational damage and attorneys’ fees and costs.
“I’d like to get my life back. I’d like to be able to get back in the classroom, to teach my students, to go to my office, to see my colleagues,” Woodcock said. “ I’d like an apology, frankly. You know, it’s not something we put in the complaint, but I’d like President Capilouto to retract the defamatory statement he made about me and to apologize publicly.”
Woodcock is the only plaintiff listed in the lawsuit.
The defendants mentioned in the lawsuit are the University of Kentucky, UK President Eli Capilouto, UK Provost Robert DiPaolo, UK general counsel William Thro, dean of the J. Rosenberg College of Law James Duff and U.S. Secretary of Education Linda McMahon.
They have yet to officially respond to the lawsuit or the allegations it contains.