- On Wednesay, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit refused to reconsider a March ruling by a three-judge panel that revived a lawsuit brought against the University of Oregon by a former graduate student, who said that the university illegally retaliated against her after she complained that female doctoral students in her program faced gender discrimination.
- The dissenting judges on the sharply divided appeals court pointed out the "danger" of the three-judge panel's decision, saying it set the bar too low for evidence the plaintiff had to present to prevent the suit's dismissal, and that the decision treated the grad student and her dissertation adviser as any other employee and employer, failing to recognize important characteristics of higher education.
- Compared to the dissenting judges' full argument of the case, which also said that keeping the lawsuit alive would jeopardize academic freedom by making it too easy for students to bring retaliation claims against professors, the court's majority simply stated that the motion failed to get a majority of the non-recused judges.
From the article:
A sharply divided federal appeals court on Wednesday refused to reconsider a March ruling that revived a lawsuit by a former graduate student against the University of Oregon. And the dissenting judges on the appeals court say that the refusal could endanger academic freedom and leave faculty members vulnerable to litigious graduate students. The lawsuit charges that the university illegally retaliated against the graduate student after she complained of gender discrimination against female doctoral students in her program. The merits of the case have not been argued, but the full U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit refused Wednesday to rehear the March decision by a three-judge panel of the court to keep the lawsuit alive. ...