Turning the Tables on Anti-Police Professor

It has become commonplace, almost expected, that professors will denounce the police and even call for violence against them. However, a CUNY adjutant professor found that not all academic audiences are receptive to his message.

It is a fair bet that on Wednesday, Sept. 13th the name Michael Isaacson meant little to you. Unless you had taken his economics course or seen him around campus you probably had no idea who he was. But, in addition to being an adjunct professor at NYC’s John Jay College of Criminal Justice, he also enjoyed an unlikely side gig – as the self-proclaimed co-founder of the NY ANTIFA movement.

I say unlikely because although many college educators claim to side with the anti-fascist and often violent movement Isaacson teaches at an institution built on teaching current and future law enforcement professionals. John Jay, part of the City University of New York system, was opened in 1964 as the first liberal arts college to focus on criminal justice and forensic sciences. Early classes were once held at the NYPD Police Academy and graduates include many senior leaders within the NYPD and major departments nationwide.

But by Friday, Sept. 15th there was hardly a cop in NYC or across America for that matter, who had not heard of Isaacson and his double life. Thanks to an interview with Fox News’s Tucker Carlson the evening before his true beliefs came to light. Mr. Carlson had invited Isaacson to his show to discuss a Tweet the professor had posted on Aug. 23rd.
“Some of Y’all might think it sucks being an anti-fascist teaching at John Jay College but I think it’s a privilege to teach future dead cops.”

I am sure that Isaacson gave the content of his tweet little though when posting that deplorable statement. I am equally sure he thought appearing on Fox News would be little more than another platform for his anti-police hatred. But he was wrong.

(Commissioner James O’Neill)

By Friday morning the City’s largest police unions, leaders, and even school officials were taking offense. The Police Benevolent Association, Detectives’ Endowment Association and Captains’ Endowment Association each released statements calling for his removal. NYPD Commissioner James O’Neill, himself John Jay alumni, expressed concern and disappointment. Even Mayor de Blasio, who often finds himself at odds with members of his department, tweeted “New York City won’t stand for the vile anti-police rhetoric of Michael Isaacson and neither should John Jay College.”

Unlike many institutions of higher learning, the leadership of John Jay also took offense to the comments. President Karol Mason called the message “abhorrent” and quickly distanced the college from Isaacson, reiterating the strong history the school has of supporting law enforcement.

Eventually, Mason also released a statement announcing Isaacson’s administrative suspension. The irony is he was not suspended for “exercising free speech” as he put it, but due to safety concerns.

“Out of concern for the safety of our students, staff, and faculty, we are immediately placing the adjunct on administrative leave as we continue to review this matter “(President Mason statement).

Message to police hating educators – What is good for the goose is good for the gander. You like to exclude police from the classroom, eject those wearing pro-police messages out of concern for your students? Well, the tables have been turned. You too can be removed for the same reason.

Disclaimer: The content in this article is the opinion of the writer and does not necessarily reflect the policies or opinions of US Patriot Tactical.

Tom Burrell

Tom enlisted in the US Marine Corps Reserves in 1987. Following service in Desert Storm, he transitioned to active duty with the US Coast Guard. In 1997 he left the USCG to pursue a position in conservation & maritime law enforcement. Tom is currently a Captain and he oversees several programs, including his agency investigation unit. He is also a training instructor in several areas including firearms, defensive tactics and first aid/CPR. In 2006 Tom received his Associate’s Degree in Criminal Justice from Harrisburg Area Community College and in 2010 a Bachelor’s Degree from Penn State University.
Tom Burrell

2 thoughts on “Turning the Tables on Anti-Police Professor

  1. Freedom of speech is enshrined in the Bill of Rights, but it definitely has its limits. The First Amendment definitely does NOT sanction death threats or calls to incite violence against groups of people, nor does it allow individuals to infringe upon their fellow citizens’ right of expression (in this case, by bullying people wearing pro-law enforcement messages).

    Good riddance to Michael Isaacson. The funny thing is that those same police he loves to vilify are the reason why he can spout such vile nonsense without someone kicking in his teeth. Those law enforcement officers he slanders are the same people who enable him to feel safe walking down the street in the evening, or entering the subway stations with his eyes glued to his iPhone and a cup of Starbucks swill in his other hand.

    It would be amusingly ironic if the Mr Isaacson has to make a 911 call for police assistance due to suspicious activity around his residence, the dispatcher were to tell him that the police cannot and will not aid him as he prefers dead cops to living ones. But that will never happen, because the men and women of the NYPD hold and conduct themselves to a higher moral and ethical standard than lowlife hippies like Isaacson could ever understand.

  2. I beleive that unless a course at an educational institution is labeled as being political then no Professor or Educational oersonell should be spouting their opinion on such matters. As to the First admendment I beleive that most Americans have no real idea exactly what the first amendment says and why it is written into the constitution, it has been sliced and diced by the media to mean that anyone can say anything however it was put in place to allow citizens to be able to openly critize the government if they did not like what was being done and to be able to do so without the fear of retaliation by said government. It also states plainly that you may not use the first amendment to cause harm to anyone. Maybe if most persons were better informed about our constitution they would understand.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *