May A Public University Fire Its Chancellor For Appearing In Porn Videos On His Own Time?

Read the original at The Popehat Report ↗
Cite

White, K. (2026, August 24). May A Public University Fire Its Chancellor For Appearing In Porn Videos On His Own Time? The Popehat Report. https://popehat.substack.com/p/may-a-public-university-fire-its

Dated when The Aporia collected the article, usually within hours of publication. Check the original for its exact date and byline.

The Popehat Report · collected 2026-08-24 · by Ken White commentary

Quick Summary

This opinion piece by an attorney discusses whether a public university can fire its chancellor for appearing in pornographic videos on his own time. The article focuses on the First Amendment rights of government employees and whether their speech can be grounds for termination. A key point is that Joe Gow, the Chancellor of the University of Wisconsin-La Crosse, claims he was fired for appearing in pornographic videos with his wife, but argues it violates his free speech rights as there was no mention of the university or his role. The article does not provide clear information on whether the university's decision to fire Gow is valid under First Amendment law, instead exploring the legal nuances involved.
Written locally by qwen2.5:14b on 2026-08-24, using this article's own text rather than the other coverage of the same event (that is the story summary below).

AI analysis runs on qwen2.5:14b, locally

Story summary

The Chancellor of the University of Wisconsin-La Crosse, Joe Gow, has been fired from his position for appearing in pornographic videos on his own time. The decision was made by the university regents, who discovered this information through an investigation. Gow's wife, Carmen Wilson, a former professor at the university, was also reportedly involved in these videos. This raises questions about whether the First Amendment protects government employees from being fired for their personal speech outside of work hours. The issue is complex and involves balancing the employee's right to free speech with the employer's interest in preventing disruption or maintaining public trust.

Written for “University Chancellor Scandal” on 2026-10-16, grounded in this article and the 0 other(s) covering the same event.

Story

📰 University Chancellor Scandal
Education · 1 article(s) covering the same event.

Compared with similar articles

Nothing to compare against. No article is close enough to this one for the pipeline to have linked or judged the pair.
How this article was measured signals, leaning charts, publisher record, byline, topics and claims

Signals How these are calculated →

Claims extracted
55
sentences that state something as happening or true
Uncertain
16%
9 of 55 hedged ("reportedly", "may", "according to")
Leaning
Leans left
expected in commentary, which argues a position · beta estimate
Publisher signals
not measured
these signals count newsroom corrections; Commentary has none to count
Outlets on this story
1
Education
Same framing elsewhere
1
articles that frame the event the way this one does
Analyzed 2026-08-24 · how these are computed

How this is being covered How these are calculated →

Article leaning vs. publisher reliability
Source leaning vs. consistency

Publisher

The Popehat Report · 20 article(s) · 0 correction(s) detected
No corrections detected for this publisher. That may mean careful reporting, or simply that nothing has been checked.

Who wrote this

Ken White
20 article(s) here · 1 carrying a prediction
🔮 I think it comes down to this: being beaten by the police doesn’t make you either a good person or a bad person, but some people would like to believe that it does.
2026-09-05 · assertive framing · Deserve’s Got Nothing To Do With It
🔮 With impeccable timing that only a university administration could achieve, BU announced Zaslav as its commencement speaker the day after the Writer’s Guild of America went on strike.
2026-09-05 · assertive framing · Speech or Cancel Culture At Boston University?
🔮 I pointed out that the somewhat predictable assignment of the case to Judge Aileen Cannon — who proved herself to be an arguably lawless Trump partisan when she entertained his attempts to derail his own investigation — will make it extraordinarily difficult to convict him.
2026-09-05 · assertive framing · Jack Smith, Donald Trump, and the Kobayashi Maru
🔮 It begins with a broad, rather vague pronouncement: (a) Any justice, judge, or magistrate judge of the United States shall disqualify himself in any proceeding in which his impartiality might reasonably be questioned.1 We’ll get back to that.
🔮 For more than half a century, courts have used a (purportedly) objective standard to determine whether a threat is true, asking whether a reasonable person, familiar with the context, would interpret the threat as a sincere expression of intent to do harm.
🔮 They couldn’t report many verbatim quotes (they should have brought someone who takes shorthand) and federal courts don’t allow broadcast or media recoding of proceedings.
2026-09-04 · assertive framing · Hunter Biden And The Fog Of War
🔮 Glenn is agitated because the United States decided to drop a charge of conspiracy to commit campaign finance violations it had previously brought against infamous manchild Sam Bankman-Fried, the answer to the question “how bad could it be, being raised by two Stanford professors?”
🔮 Assuming, as we have, for it has not been challenged, that this statistical side of the Department of Agriculture is the exercise of a function within the purview of the Constitution, it must follow that any conspiracy which is calculated to obstruct or impair its efficiency and destroy the value of its operations and reports as fair, impartial, and reasonably accurate would be to defraud the United States by depriving it of its lawful right and duty of promulgating or diffusing the information so officially acquired in the way and at the time required by law or departmental regulation.
2026-09-04 · assertive framing · People Are Lying To You About The Trump Indictment
🔮 In the old days, the resulting sentencing range was mandatory and bound the court; in 2005 the Supreme Court ruled that the Guidelines could only be treated as a recommendation, not a mandate.
2026-09-04 · assertive framing · Beware The Flood Of Trump Sentencing Disinformation
🔮 One is to describe, to the best of your ability, what you believe the state of the law is, how and where courts might agree or disagree with you, and how your view of what the law should be differs from how courts currently interpret it.
Also by Ken White
Deserve’s Got Nothing To Do With It
2026-09-05 · The Popehat Report
Speech or Cancel Culture At Boston University?
2026-09-05 · The Popehat Report
Jack Smith, Donald Trump, and the Kobayashi Maru
2026-09-05 · The Popehat Report
Nothing else under this byline is closely related to this article, so these are simply their most recent.
All 20 articles by Ken White →

Topics

Americans First Amendment UW-La Crosse Wisconsin the University of Wisconsin-La Crosse

Subjects

Gow ORG · 3× Joe Gow PERSON · 2× UW-La Crosse ORG · 2× Americans NORP · 1× Carmen Wilson PERSON · 1× Miller PERSON · 1× Mitch Epner PERSON · 1× The Associated Press ORG · 1× Wisconsin ORG · 1× the University of Wisconsin-La Crosse ORG · 1×

Narrative

As I explained at the beginning of this year, answering that question requires a complicated analysis of whether the speech is part of the employee's job, whether it's on a matter of public interest, and whether the government employer's interest in preventing disruption outweighs the employee's interest in speaking.
framing: assertive · carried by 1 article(s) · first seen 2026-08-24
🔮 Were it not so, what would I have to gripe about?1

Claims (55 extracted, 9 hedged)

First Amendment rights are constantly misunderstood by most Americans enjoying their protection. asserted
rights → misunderstand → protection
Were it not so, what would I have to gripe about?1 asserted
I → have → ?
One of the most misunderstood questions in First Amendment law is whether government employers may fire government employees for their speech. uncertain
employers → fire → speech
As I explained at the beginning of this year, answering that question requires a complicated analysis of whether the speech is part of the employee's job, whether it's on a matter of public interest, and whether the government employer's interest in preventing disruption outweighs the employee's interest in speaking. asserted
interest → explain → interest
Since that was my first post of 2023, it seems only fitting to return to the subject for the last post. asserted
it → seem → post
My friend and classmate Mitch Epner, who is always worth reading, came to the rescue with a piquant story out of Wisconsin. asserted
who → come → Wisconsin
Joe Gow, the Chancellor of the University of Wisconsin-La Crosse, has announced that he was fired for appearing in porn videos: asserted
he → announce → videos
Gow told The Associated Press in a phone interview Thursday morning that regents had discovered that he and his wife, former UW-La Crosse professor Carmen Wilson, had been producing and appearing in pornographic videos. asserted
he → tell → videos
He maintained that he never mentioned UW-La Crosse or his role at the university in any of the videos and the firing violated his free speech rights. asserted
firing → maintain → rights
“My wife and I live in a country where we have a First Amendment,” he said. asserted
he → live → Amendment
“We’re dealing with consensual adult sexuality. asserted
We → deal → sexuality
The regents are overreacting. asserted
regents → overreact → ?
They’re certainly not adhering to their own commitment to free speech or the First Amendment.” asserted
They → adhere → speech
Can they do that? asserted
they → do → that
The university I mean. asserted
I → mean → ?
Clearly Mr. Gow and his wife have a First Amendment right to produce, appear in, and distribute pornographic videos, so long as the videos do not stray into the very narrow and very rarely prosecuted First Amendment exception for obscenity. asserted
videos → have → obscenity
“Obscenity” for these purposes is material that meets the three-part Miller test, which may be summarized like this: Whether the average person, applying contemporary adult community standards, finds that the matter, taken as a whole, appeals to prurient interests (i.e., an erotic, lascivious, abnormal, unhealthy, degrading, shameful, or morbid interest in nudity, sex, or excretion); Whether the average person, applying contemporary adult community standards, finds that the matter depicts or describes sexual conduct in a patently offensive way (i.e., ultimate sexual acts, normal or perverted, actual or simulated, masturbation, excretory functions, lewd exhibition of the genitals, or sado-masochistic sexual abuse); and Whether a reasonable person finds that the matter, taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value. uncertain
matter → meet → value
I prefer Justice Potter Stewart’s summary “I know it when I see it,” but opinions vary. asserted
opinions → prefer → it
Anyway in modern America, as the obscenity test is applied, it’s not plausible that a video of two people having sex is going to meet this standard unless they are really very inventively filthy. asserted
they → apply → standard
You may think it should qualify as obscene under this test, but there’s functionally no chance that it will be prosecuted. uncertain
it → think → test
But that’s about the government wearing its “sovereign” hat — acting as Chancellor Joe Gow’s civic authority with the power to prosecute. asserted
government → ’ → power
What about the government wearing its “employer” hat — can it fire him from his government job? asserted
it → wear → job
Here’s how we answer the question. asserted
we → ’ → question
First, we ask if Mr. Gow was speaking as a private citizen or in his capacity as a government employee. asserted
Gow → ask → employee
If he was speaking on the job, the First Amendment doesn’t protect him from being fired. asserted
Amendment → speak → him
That allows the government to fire you for being insubordinate, bad at your job, and impolitic at representing the government. asserted
government → allow → government
There’s an exception to this rule for public university professors engaged in teaching, who are still protected even though their job is to teach. asserted
job → ’ → teaching
Here, there’s no indication that performing in pornographic videos was within the scope of Mr. Gow’s job as Chancellor. asserted
performing → ’ → Chancellor
It’s not UNLV after all.2 asserted
It → ’ → ?
Second, we ask if Mr. Gow was expressing himself on a matter of public concern. asserted
Gow → ask → concern
Matters of purely private concern and grievance (like, say, whether the Inspector General’s secretary keeps microwaving fish during her lunch break and the whole office smells like ass) are not protected. asserted
office → keep → ass
You could certainly make an argument that the public is interested in pornography, given its vigorous consumption of it. uncertain
public → make → it
But it appears to me that the Supreme Court has already foreclosed that argument. asserted
Court → appear → argument
In 2004 they held that a City of San Diego police officer was not expressing himself on a matter of public concern by selling pornographic videos of himself, and that therefore the First Amendment did not protect him from termination. asserted
Amendment → hold → termination
So this part of the test is fatal to Mr. Gow’s First Amendment claim unless his videos include some sort of commentary or exploration of a newsworthy issue. uncertain
videos → include → issue
I don’t know, like, it’s a satire of Wisconsin’s redistricting crisis with the title “either way voters get screwed.” asserted
voters → know → title
Third, if Mr. Gow’s claim survived, we ask whether the government did something to retaliate against the protected speech. uncertain
government → survive → speech
Here that’s easy — they fired him and apparently told him they were firing him over the porn videos. asserted
they → ’ → videos
That’s clear retaliation. asserted
That → ’ → ?
Sometimes it’s not so simple if the retaliation is some minor discipline or counseling or an investigation. asserted
retaliation → ’ → ?
…and 15 more, not listed.
💬Give feedback
🕘History 🎫Support