Cases & Developments

Opinion affirming summary judgment in favor of the University. Plaintiff, an unsuccessful candidate for a tenure-track position in the School of Theology at Mercer University who is white, brought a discrimination claim against the University alleging that notes kept by members of the search committee showed a preference to hire a candidate who is African American in order to add to the diversity of the faculty. The University did not share demographic information about the candidates with the search committee, and plaintiff was not offered an interview. In affirming summary judgment in favor of the University, the Eleventh Circuit held that although his evidence showed that the “hiring process was infected with an invidious focus on the race of the candidates,” plaintiff’s claim failed because he was unable to demonstrate that the decisionmakers knew his race. In particular, the court found that testimony from a faculty member that he “probably” mentioned to a member of the search committee that plaintiff was his cousin’s niece’s husband was insufficient to defeat testimony from members of the committee that they were unaware of plaintiff’s race when he was dropped from consideration. 

Order granting-in-part and denying-in-part Defendants’ Motions to Dismiss. Plaintiff, the Deputy Executive Director for Accountability at the Mississippi Community College Board who is African American, brought equal protection claims against the members of the Board after he was passed over for the position of Executive Director in favor of an allegedly less qualified white colleague, seeking instatement in the position and damages. The court permitted plaintiff’s claim for instatement to proceed against the defendants in their official capacities, finding that “if reinstatement addresses an ongoing violation,” then, a request for instatement should be treated likewise since both forms of relief seek to remedy “discrete decisions that leave someone without the desired job.” It also permitted plaintiff’s claims against individual capacity defendants to proceed, finding that the successful candidate was a sufficiently similar comparator to plead a prima facie case of discrimination and that the asserted failure-to-promote claim was sufficiently well established to overcome defendants’ assertion of qualified immunity.   

U.S. Department of Education, Office of Civil Rights (OCR) Dear Colleague Letter (DCL) on the obligation under Title VI to address discrimination, including harassment, on campus. Noting “a nationwide rise in reports of hate crimes and harassment, including an alarming rise in disturbing antisemitic incidents and threats to Jewish, Israeli, Muslim, Arab, and Palestinian students on college campuses,” the DCL reviews institutions’ obligations under Title VI and its implementing regulations to provide a learning environment that is free from discrimination, including harassment based on an individual’s actual or perceived “shared ancestry or ethnic characteristics” and “citizenship or residency in a country with a dominant religion or distinct religious identity.” The DCL also reiterates that harassment may create a hostile environment even if it is not directed at a particular individual.