Should Joe Gow be allowed to teach at UW-La Crosse? UW Regents committee to hold disciplinary hearing

Does former University of Wisconsin-La Crosse Chancellor Joe Gow deserves a future teaching career on campus ? And are pornographic videos protected by the First Amendment?

A UW Board of Regents committee will consider both questions in a disciplinary hearing Friday as it weighs whether to revoke Gow's tenure.

Gow was already removed as chancellor late last year after the UW Board of Regents discovered he and his wife created sex videos , sometimes with adult film stars, and posted them on porn websites. He still retains his faculty appointment as a communications professor but has been on paid leave while the drawn-out faculty disciplinary process plays out.

A decision on whether to fire Gow could come as soon as next week.

Here's what to know:

Why was Joe Gow fired as chancellor?

Gow and his wife, Carmen Wilson, created sex tapes and posted them on porn websites such as OnlyFans, PornHub and XHamster. Many of the videos feature adult film stars and include segments on vegan cooking.

The couple also self-published two books about their experiences in the adult film industry using pseudonyms: "Monogamy with Benefits: How Porn Enriches Our Relationship" in 2015 and "Married with Benefits: Our Real-life Adult Industry Adventures" in 2018.

What is tenure?

Tenure is a job protection some professors earn after several years on probationary status. They can only be dismissed with just cause or laid off through policy.

The purpose of tenure is to protect academic freedom, the principle that professors creating knowledge and expressing ideas — even if some consider it offensive — should be free to do so without the threat of intimidation or retaliation.

Wasn't there already a Joe Gow hearing?

Yes. Under state law, a tenured professor is entitled to due process, which includes having a faculty committee hear their case before the UW Board of Regents decides on termination.

A UW-La Crosse faculty committee heard nearly five hours of testimony over two days this summer and unanimously recommended Gow lose his faculty position .

A professor creating porn videos in their private capacity wasn't unethical, the committee said, but they found Gow's response after his hobby became international news problematic. They said he "exploited" his role as a faculty member and capitalized on the controversy without the university's interests in mind.

When is Joe Gow's board hearing?

The board's personnel matters review committee will hear the case at noon Friday in Room 1820 of Van Hise Hall at UW-Madison.

Gow requested the hearing be public. Both UW-La Crosse and Gow will receive up to 20 minutes to present their cases and another 10 minutes each for rebuttal. Committee members can ask questions.

The committee is led by Ed Manydeeds. Other committee members are Joan Prince, Ashok Rai, Jack Salzwedel, Mark Tyler and Karen Walsh.

What is UW-La Crosse's case?

UW System attorneys Wade Harrison and Jennifer Lattis are representing UW-La Crosse. In briefs submitted to the board last month, which Gow shared with the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, they relied on similar arguments made in the faculty hearing.

"Had Gow only made pornographic videos with his wife which became public through means other than Gow's self-promotion, the situation might be different," they wrote. "But Gow chose to make his hobby public, promote it, and personally profit from it. Simply put, Gow engaged in outside activities knowing they conflicted with his responsibilities to behave ethically and professionally."

They said legal precedent was on their side, pointing to a 2004 U.S. Supreme Court case about a San Diego police officer fired after posting sex tapes online. The court ruled in favor of the city, which argued the officer's activity hampered the department's function and wasn't a matter of public concern. Public employees must establish this for First Amendment claims.

Harrison and Lattis said Gow exercised a pattern of poor judgment, and would create "serious risk" for UW-La Crosse if he returned to the classroom.

"The survival of a public university is dependent on legislative funding, grant funding, tuition revenue, and donations," they wrote. "Gow's behavior, left to continue, could negatively affect all four. Such misconduct satisfies the definition of just cause."

What is Joe Gow's case?

Mark Leitner, of the Milwaukee-based law firm Laffey, Leitner and Goode, is representing Gow. This strays from Gow's previous strategy when he represented himself in the faculty hearing.

In briefs, Leitner focused his arguments on the First Amendment. He said UW-La Crosse's reputation had not been damaged because the interim chancellor testified to healthy enrollment, major donations received and finances considered among the strongest in the UW System.

"Yes, sometimes donors change their minds, the Legislature cuts state funding, and enrollment declines," he wrote of potential future harm. "And sometimes these things happen because people do not like the substance of a faculty member's protected speech — and the response is that sometimes, the protection of free speech requires the university to tolerate it. If the First Amendment means anything, it must prohibit a university from caving into public or government pressure that is based directly on the protected speech of a faculty member."

Leitner said the San Diego case was a poor comparison because the police officer wore his official city police uniform in the video and pantomimed police work while Gow made only "brief and extremely vague" mentions of his university job, which included references to a "Midwestern location," his "academic career," and one instance when Gow's full name was said on camera.

Leitner said there was "very little interest" in Gow's books and videos until the UW Regents outed him in a public firing, which he said undercut UW-La Crosse's argument about Gow choosing to place himself in the public eye.

Why does Joe Gow have a lawyer when he previously did not?

The Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression, a nonpartisan nonprofit defending free speech, arranged Gow's legal representation. Zach Greenberg, faculty legal defense counsel for the organization, sent a letter to UW Regents President Amy Bogost urging the board to side with Gow.

Greenberg said in the letter the First Amendment protects faculty when they speak as private citizens on matters of public concern. He said books and videos promoting a plant-based diet and healthy sexual relationships would qualify as such.

What's at stake for Joe Gow?

Gow stands to lose financially if fired. His more than $313,000 in unused sick leave, which state employees accumulate and typically receive as a payout after retirement, could be revoked.

It's unlikely, however, he would lose his pension. A state worker's pension is an earned benefit that generally cannot be taken away because of termination or criminal charges, according to the Wisconsin Department of Employee Trust Funds, which administers pensions.

Gow has not been criminally charged.

What happens after the hearing?

The committee will meet behind closed doors and make a recommendation to send to the full 18-member board.

The UW System told Gow's attorney the committee's recommendation would be confidential, according to emails shared with the Journal Sentinel.

It's unclear when the board will vote on the matter, but its next scheduled meeting is Sept. 26-27 at UW-Parkside.

Gow has already hinted at filing a lawsuit alleging wrongful termination if he is fired.

Contact Kelly Meyerhofer at or 414-223-5168. Follow her on X (Twitter) at .