UC Berkeley suspended lecturer Peyrin Kao for six months after university officials concluded he brought political advocacy into the classroom by discussing his public hunger strike and criticizing Israel’s actions in Gaza during instructional time. The suspension follows earlier reprimands for off‑topic classroom remarks and a department censure—moves that reignited debate over the boundaries between faculty expression and instructional obligations. Berkeley provost Benjamin Hermalin’s correspondence cited instances where Kao had discussed the hunger strike in class and stated his intent to ‘bring the starvation here, to Berkeley,’ saying those actions aimed to influence students’ political thinking. Kao and supporters argue the punishment violates academic freedom and the First Amendment; opinion pieces defending Kao called the sanctions punitive and disproportionate. The case amplifies a larger higher‑education fault line: administrators balancing classroom neutrality, academic freedom and student comfort amid politically charged campus activism.