UCLA Chancellor Julio Frenk is facing backlash from within the university community for his statement that condemned a recent 9/11 anniversary event that featured the lawyer for Khalid Sheikh Mohammed. A group of at least 59 UCLA School of Law faculty members, including an assistant dean, have signed a letter demanding Frenk retract his rebuke, asserting that his statement was "not befitting of a leader."
Frenk had previously voiced his objections to the law school symposium, titled “25 Years After 9/11: Reimagining Freedom, Justice, and Security,” and supported UCLA professor Judea Pearl, father of terrorism victim Daniel Pearl, who had also condemned the event. Frenk stated, “Speaking at UCLA should never be mistaken for the university’s approval, endorsement, or acceptance of an individual’s viewpoints, or our institution’s indifference to the pain their presence may cause members of our community.” He added, “In this case, I understand why Professor Pearl and others are deeply hurt. Judea’s voice, and the history behind it, deserve to be heard with the seriousness and humanity they demand.”
The faculty letter argued that Frenk's statement implicitly endorsed the criticism that the symposium supported terrorism by including Melanie T. Partow, a government lawyer employed by the Trump Administration’s Department of Defense who was assigned to defend Mohammed. The faculty asserted that Partow's comments during the symposium focused on the legal processes and military commission structures for trying terrorism cases and did not reference any specific client.
“For the Chancellor to affiliate himself with these disparaging attacks against the Symposium instead of verifying what it was actually about is not befitting of a leader,” the faculty members wrote.
Frenk, who became UCLA’s seventh chancellor in January 2025, later responded to the school’s Academic Senate, which had also expressed concerns about his initial statement. While he stood by his carefully chosen words, Frenk sought to clarify that his statement was not a condemnation of the law school or the concept of legal representation for individuals accused of serious crimes.
“Some subsequent accounts have characterized it as a condemnation, rebuke or repudiation of the symposium. A careful read of my statement will fail to find any of those words. Furthermore, the statement did not criticize the School of Law or question the validity of legal representation, including for individuals accused of horrific acts,” Frenk stated. However, a representative for Frenk told The California Post that the chancellor's statement was "absolutely a condemnation" of the 9/11 event.
Frenk concluded his remarks by emphasizing the balance between academic freedom and community obligations. “The key point of my statement is that we can uphold academic freedom while also expressing support for members of our community who are hurting. A university is more than a collection of individual rights and freedoms. It is a community, and community carries with it obligations of reciprocity,” he said.
A broader open letter, signed by over 200 individuals including professors from Stanford and Harvard, also called for Frenk's retraction. The letter stated that the implication that the conference may have endorsed antisemitism and terrorism was inaccurate and compounded risks for lawyers and scholars engaged in critical legal work.
The event, which took place on September 10 and 11, featured Partow alongside other academics. The timing of the symposium also occurred as UCLA faced lawsuits related to allegations of failing to address antisemitism on campus.
Victims of the 9/11 attacks expressed dismay at the event. Jim McCaffrey, an FDNY lieutenant who responded to the World Trade Center attacks, called the situation "absolutely absurd" and questioned the direction of academia.
Judea Pearl, whose son Daniel Pearl was beheaded by Khalid Sheikh Mohammed in Pakistan in 2002, stated he was "ashamed of my university" and accused UCLA of "weaponizing" the 25th anniversary of the attacks.