School Employee Fired For Private Email

[GotZoom]

William Paterson University Tramples Student’s Constitutional Rights
Charges Student with Discrimination and Harassment for ‘Demeaning’ Homosexuality

July 20, 2005

FIRE Press Release
WAYNE, N.J., July 20, 2005—William Paterson University in New Jersey has convicted student employee Jihad Daniel of “discrimination” and “harassment”—without due process—for describing homosexuality as a “perversion” in a private response to a professor’s unsolicited announcement of a university event that promoted a positive view of lesbian relationships.

“William Paterson’s punishment of Mr. Daniel is a direct attack on freedom of speech,” remarked David French, president of the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE), which intervened on Daniel’s behalf. “For the university to convict a student of ‘harassment’ for sending a single, non-threatening e-mail dangerously trivializes real harassment.”

Daniel’s “offense” took place on March 8, 2005, when he responded to an unsolicited e-mail from Professor Arlene Holpp Scala, chair of the department of women’s studies, about a viewing and discussion of a film described as “a lesbian relationship story.” Daniel privately replied to Professor Scala, requesting that he not be sent “any mail about ‘Connie and Sally’ and ‘Adam and Steve.’” Daniel went on, “These are perversions. The absence of God in higher education brings on confusion. That is why in these classes the Creator of the heavens and the earth is never mentioned.”

On March 10, Professor Scala filed a complaint with the university’s Office of Employment Equity and Diversity, accusing Daniel of violating university nondiscrimination policy because his message “sound[ed] threatening” and because she didn’t want to “feel threatened at [her] place of work when [she] send out announcements about events that address lesbian issues.”

Director of Employment Equity and Diversity John I. Sims subsequently proceeded to “investigate” Scala’s complaint. On June 15, William Paterson President Arnold Speert wrote Daniel a letter of reprimand, stating that “the investigator concluded that since the Merriam-Webster dictionary definition of ‘perversion’…is clearly a ‘derogatory or demeaning’ term,” Daniel therefore was guilty of violating state discrimination and harassment regulations. The president also wrote that the letter of reprimand would be placed in Daniel’s permanent employee file.

Daniel contacted FIRE for assistance and appealed Speert’s decision on First Amendment grounds. President Speert responded that the constitutional argument was “beyond the scope of this finding” and that “the assessed penalty of a written reprimand must, therefore, stand as issued.”

“William Paterson University is knowingly disregarding the U.S. Constitution. No one here was ‘harassed’ or ‘threatened’ as defined by the law. The university simply strongly disliked a student’s point of view,” remarked Greg Lukianoff, FIRE’s director of legal and public advocacy. “As the Supreme Court wrote in its seminal opinion in West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette, ‘freedom to differ is not limited to things that do not matter much. That would be a mere shadow of freedom.’ William Paterson’s administration would be well served by reading this compelling opinion.”

FIRE wrote President Speert on July 5 to protest William Paterson’s unlawful actions and to remind this public university of its obligations to protect students’ constitutional rights. FIRE pointed out that the university’s decision “blatantly contradicts decades of Supreme Court decisions clarifying unlawful harassment and protecting freedom of expression,” and that “William Paterson and its administrators cannot simply choose to ignore the First Amendment when it becomes inconvenient.”

On July 15, New Jersey Attorney General Peter C. Harvey responded to FIRE, asserting that “speech which violates a non-discrimination policy is not protected” by the First Amendment. Harvey also denied that the university had violated Daniel’s due process rights, and stated that “the recommended penalty against Jihad Daniel will stand as issued,” subject to yet another appeal by Daniel.

“Just as the university is free to sponsor events discussing the issue of homosexuality, Mr. Daniel must be free to dissent. To claim that a nondiscrimination policy trumps his First Amendment rights is dishonest and unlawful,” declared FIRE’s Lukianoff. “William Paterson and the attorney general have decided that Mr. Daniel is guilty until proven innocent. FIRE will continue to fight such illiberal actions until Mr. Daniel’s rights are vindicated.”

Link has copies of email, letter of reprimand, etc.

http://www.thefire.org/index.php/article/6119.html

 

[Zhukov]

His name is Jihad?

That's kind of strange.

 

[colehart]

Had he intiated the e-mail, I would say they are within their rights to dismiss him. However, since he was responding to an unsolicited e-mail from staff, they are wrong!

 

[archangel]

Had he intiated the e-mail, I would say they are within their rights to dismiss him. However, since he was responding to an unsolicited e-mail from staff, they are wrong!

just another example of why the ACLU et al should be indicted on "Rico" statues!