Imagine a university where speaking out against a controversial professor could result in losing your student leadership role. That’s the reality at Rutgers University, where two Turning Point USA (TPUSA) officers are facing removal for daring to challenge a professor with ties to Antifa.
Fox News reported that Karima Woodyard, Rutgers’ director of student involvement and leadership, is demanding the ouster of TPUSA treasurer Megyn Doyle and outreach coordinator Ava Kwan over their public criticism of professor Mark Bray, known for his affiliations with Antifa and his recent relocation to Europe, citing safety concerns.
Woodyard’s justification for the removal is purely procedural, claiming that Doyle, a Newark campus student, and Kwan, a graduate student, are ineligible to hold executive positions in an undergraduate organization on the New Brunswick campus.
In an email obtained by Fox News Digital, she directed TPUSA chapter leaders to hold new elections to comply with university policy. It’s hard not to wonder if this sudden enforcement of rules is just a convenient way to quiet voices that challenge the progressive status quo.
The trouble began when Doyle launched a petition to remove Bray, citing his past statements endorsing Antifa and his authorship of books like "Antifa: The Anti-Fascist Handbook."
Bray’s history includes identifying with the Black Rose Anarchist Federation and participating in high-profile protests like the G20 in Hamburg and Occupy Wall Street. His activism clearly isn’t just academic—it’s personal and, to many, deeply concerning.
Last week, Bray announced on Bluesky that he and his family were moving to Spain, citing safety concerns with a rather dramatic flair: "Our plane to Spain is in the air!" One can’t help but question whether this move is truly about safety or a convenient exit from mounting scrutiny. Either way, it’s a curious backdrop to the university’s response to his critics.
Bray’s online presence hasn’t helped calm the waters, with posts promoting events like "Another War Is Possible" in New York City, focused on fighting fascism and capitalist globalization.
Add to that a blog post from the Black Rose Anarchist Foundation calling for disruptive on-campus organizing, and it’s no surprise students like Doyle and Kwan felt compelled to speak out. Their concerns seem rooted in a genuine fear of radical ideologies taking hold on campus.
Woodyard’s email, sent on a recent Monday, didn’t mince words about the need for compliance with student organization rules. But the timing of this “investigation” into TPUSA’s leadership smells of something more than bureaucratic nitpicking.
As Kwan herself put it, "Based on the timing of this investigation, this reads as a weaponization of procedure against Megyn and I as a result of our public opposition to self-proclaimed Antifa affiliate, Mark Bray."
Kwan didn’t stop there, pointing out a lack of transparency from Rutgers’ administration. "We have requested transparency from the Rutgers administration as to who ordered this investigation into our chapter and why," she said. It’s a fair question—why now, and why these students, if not to send a message?
Meanwhile, the university seems to be doubling down on protecting Bray, with some students urging president William F. Tate IV to publicly back the professor.
A resolution supporting Bray’s academic freedom is even set for a vote by the Rutgers University Senate on an upcoming Friday. It’s almost as if dissent against certain ideologies is the real crime here, not the ideologies themselves.
On the flip side, a technology developer with no clear ties to Rutgers has launched a Change.org petition to disband the TPUSA chapter entirely, accusing it of spreading "hate speech" and fostering a toxic environment. It’s a classic tactic—label disagreement as hate to avoid engaging with the actual argument. But isn’t shutting down a student group the real toxicity?
Fox News Digital reached out to Woodyard, Rutgers, and TPUSA president Stephen Wallace for comment, but no immediate responses were forthcoming.
The silence speaks volumes, leaving observers to wonder if the university is more interested in damage control than dialogue. Transparency, it seems, is in short supply.
Tate himself has weighed in via an opinion piece on NJ.com, published on a recent Tuesday, attempting to thread the needle on free speech.
While his words aim for balance, they leave room for skepticism about whether Rutgers truly values all perspectives or just the ones that fit a certain narrative. It’s a tightrope walk, and many conservatives might argue he’s leaning too far left.
The clash at Rutgers isn’t just about two student leaders or one professor—it’s about whether universities are still places for robust debate or merely echo chambers for approved thought.
When procedural rules are weaponized against students who challenge controversial figures like Bray, it sends a chilling message to others who might speak up. Conservatives on campus must feel like they’re playing a rigged game.
