Volokh Conspiracy posts about Ashland and John Lewis.
I'm not as worked up about this as many others. I understand that the issues are based on contractual obligations. The contract states that John Lewis is required to support Judeo-Christian values and the Anthem Foundation research. It seems like a made-for-lawsuit contract.
I cannot imagine a way that it could possibly be followed. Unless there is an interpretation of Judeo-Christian values that Ayn Rand would support. I know that "western values" can sometimes overlap with Judeo-Christian values but could never encompass altruism and faith in a higher being (as much as fundamentalists keep trying to force it).
I am a notorious stickler, however, and nitpick wording to death (again--related to writing procedures at my former job). If a manufacturing worker had conflicting instructions like that and the end product was messed up, they would have been reprimanded for not pausing their work for clarification--not to mention what would happen to the teeming masses who had to sign-off the paperwork. I cannot see only one party at fault here.
Perhaps it comes back down to sanction. We understand the importance of sanction (though I have severe questions about how engaging in any disagreement is called sanction) and we shouldn't be surprised that someone else does as well.
Please do not mistake this as apologetics for fundamentalists who want to change a standard liberal arts university into a religion-based institution complete with an article of faith agreement. I agree that this is a poor move for Ashland and indicates that there is a university that has fallen to the 'dark side,' which is always bad news. I am putting out my opinion based on a decade of having to deal with words in a non-contractual but very concrete sense.
Related Posts: Volokh Conspiracy Picks Up John Lewis Story (this post)
More on John Lewis and Objectivism at Reason Hit and Run
FIRE Representing John Lewis
Reason Hits the John Lewis Story
John Lewis--Off to Bigger and Better Things