Law School To Face Lawsuit Over Alleged Racial Bias In Tenure Decision
The circuit court found universities should not be granted 'special deference' in employment discrimination lawsuits.
The University of the District of Columbia David A. Clarke School of Law will have to defend itself over allegations of racial bias in its tenure decisions, according to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. Kemit Mawakana brought a racial bias lawsuit against the law school when he was denied tenure and subsequently fired. The district court granted the university’s motion for summary judgment, since universities receive “heightened deference” on academic decisions. But last week, the circuit court overturned that decision.
The appellate court found that universities are not immune to employment discrimination lawsuits just because decisions about tenure are complex, and that the concept of academic freedom doesn’t grant universities “special deference in Title VII tenure cases.”
The ordinary Title VII claimant’s burden may be “especially difficult to meet when it comes to academic tenure,” because (1) tenure decisions are informed by specialized, multi-factored judgments and (2) numerous decisionmakers are usually involved in the tenure review process. But the burden is no more difficult to meet than in any other Title VII case where the employment decision at issue involves complex judgments and numerous decisionmakers are involved. In other words, the Title VII burden is no more difficult to meet because the employer is a university. Although the First Amendment grants a university certain freedoms, the freedom to discriminate is not among them. (Citations omitted.)
As reported by Big Law Business, Mawakana presented sufficient evidence to survive a motion for summary judgment that the law school assessed tenure applications of black and white professors differently:
For example, the university treated a co-authored work, and work published in the university’s own law review, as inferior to other work in assessing the application of a black candidate, but not in assessing a white candidate’s application, the court said.
Additionally, two faculty members who were privy to the internal workings of the tenure review process testified that they believed the university had disfavored black professors, it said.
As such, the case was remanded back to the district court for further proceedings.
Kathryn Rubino is a Senior Editor at Above the Law, and host of The Jabot podcast. AtL tipsters are the best, so please connect with her. Feel free to email her with any tips, questions, or comments and follow her on Twitter (@Kathryn1).
