Umm, she's not a black latina from the Bronx. So, that IS a lie. And, SHE said she lied.
And, she said that she lied as means of FRAUD.
Why should an admitted liar who lied as a means of fraud keep their job?
Lied how? Only if she literally wrote "as a black latina from the bronx" somewhere. The EEOC data is for reporting purposes. Couldn't fire her for that.
I'm against departments pushing out people that they don't like, and I'm against departments pushing out people with tenure.
But, if Krug hadn't resigned she should have been fired.
She lied on her job application, which was very likely a violation of documents that she signed.
Even if there's was no legal justification for firing her she can't really perform her job: teaching, service, and scholarship.
What good would it do you to take a class with her? To get a rec letter from her? To have her as your mentor?
How could she be a useful committee member at her institution?
Who's going to give her grants? How many of her articles will escape being desk rejections?
She lied to advance her career, and she admitted it. She cannot justify having a place in the academy.
i'm very much against the idea that a department can push you out just because they don't like you. hopefully she got a deal and it's just not being reported.