After a law professor sued West Point over a policy limiting faculty speech, a judge ruled such restrictions unconstitutional. The U.S. Military Academy at West Point continues to require top officials to review its civilian professors’ requests to speak at external events, despite a federal judge’s ruling last month that such a mandate is unconstitutional, according to documents and correspondence obtained by The Washington Post.

Officials are citing a year-old memorandum circulated by Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth on “external engagements” as the justification for the reviews, emails obtained by The Post show.

Three outside law professors who reviewed the materials at the request of The Post said West Point’s actions appear to violate the order issued by Judge Cathy Seibel in September that ended a lawsuit filed by a civilian professor at the academy.

A West Point spokesperson wrote in an emailed statement Monday that the academy “remains compliant with Department of War directives and the order issued by the Southern District of New York regarding the challenged local policy.”The Defense Department did not respond to a request for comment.

West Point implemented a rule in early 2025 that sought to bar civilian and militaryprofessors from publishing papers, speaking at conferences or appearing on podcasts without seeking approval from superiors. Leadership at the academy announced the guidelines a month after President Donald Trump issued an executive order forbidding America’s military service academies from “promoting, advancing or otherwise inculcating” ideas the administration decided were “radical,” “divisive” or “un-American.”West Point’s speech policy, and an accompanying directive that prohibited Bakken from expressing his opinions and beliefs to West Point students about legal issues, “violate the First Amendment and are therefore unconstitutional,” Seibel wrote in her ruling.

She “permanently enjoined” the academy from enforcing its speech policy for civilian professors and from limiting what Bakken can say to his students in the classroom. (Bakken filed his complaint as a class-action suit on behalf of civilian professors, so her ruling could not affect military faculty.) In spite of that ruling, West Point’s dean, Brig. Gen. Nicholas Gist, published a memorandum this fall specifying that all academy personnel must seek approval up the chain of command before speaking at places other than West Point.

The three-page memo, obtained by The Post and titled “Approval of Participation in External Engagements,” says this process is required because of a Sept. 15, 2025, memo issued by Hegseth. Gist’s memo made no mention of Seibel’s ruling.

Hegseth’s memo, according to a copy obtained by The Post, says all “[Department of War] personnel must seek approval” from a supervisor for “participation in external engagements,” including appearances before “non-governmental organizations, academic institutions [and] research organizations,” among other groups. Hegseth’s memo does not mention West Point or any other service academy.

In his memo, Gist listed 10 events at which he determined West Point staff would be allowed to speak. The events, scheduled between Sept. 17 and Nov. 11, include appearances at other universities, a conversation in New York hosted by the French Embassy and a training session held for the “FBI National Academy Association in Philadelphia.”The professors approved for attendance are a mix of military and civilian faculty, according to a Post review.

Separately, on Oct. 1, a West Point legal official emailed a civilian professor to discuss an “external engagement request” the professor had submitted, according to copies of the correspondence obtained by The Post. The official wrote that the civilian professor seemed unaware of Hegseth’s September 2025 memo.

“All external engagements (with some exceptions) require a legal review and approval by the first GO in your chain,” the official wrote. “Since you are speaking at the event, as opposed to attending, the dean would have to sign off on the participation.”Three civilian professors at West Point, who spoke on the condition of anonymity for fear of retaliation, confirmed the academy requires all faculty to undergo a review before they are permitted to speak at outside events.

Separately, the three law professors contacted by The Post reviewed the judge’s ruling in Bakken’s case, as well as portions of Gist’s memorandum and the legal official’s email. All three said West Point appears to be circumventing the judge’s ruling by using a different justification to continue to enforce its speech rules.

All three legal experts also said they see West Point’s actions as part of a pattern of defiance of court orders exhibited by the second Trump administration. This spring, Litman published an article in Duke Law Journal exploring a phenomenon she and co-author Daniel Deacon called “legalistic noncompliance,” which they wrote has “dominated the second Trump administration’s approach to unfavorable court rulings.”The West Point case is a perfect example, the professors said, of the administration’s response to adverse court decisions. When the administration is told it does not have the legal authority to enforce one of its policies, officials will switch to citing a different source as the justification, they said.

Fidell said he expects Bakken may have to go back to court to compel West Point to comply with the judge’s ruling in his case.

Bakken told The Post that West Point supervisors have not reviewed or asked to review his speaking engagements since the court ruling, although he noted he has not asked for permission to speak during that time.

He wrote in an email that he believes West Point is continuing “to enforce an illegal order.”West Point could still appeal the ruling in Bakken’s case. The academy has until early November to do so.