A professor who lost his job after saying a document about microaggresions was “garbage” can sue his former employer, a federal judge has ruled.
The College Fix reported that University of North Texas (UNT) professor Nathaniel Hiers was fired in 2019 after he referred to a handout about microagressions as trash. “Don’t leave garbage lying around,” Heirs reportedly wrote anonymously on a chalkboard near the handout. Later, the chair of the university’s math department asked who had written the message. At that time, Hiers came forward to say that he had written the criticism.
When it came time to decide whether to renew Hiers’ contract for the spring semester, UNT math department Chair Ralf Schmidt told Heirs he would not be kept on staff because of that specific incident.
“My decision not to continue your employment in the spring semester was based on your actions in the grad lounge on 11/26 [2019], and your subsequent response,” Schmidt told Hiers in an email, according to the latter’s lawsuit. “In our conversation you characterized the flyers that upset you as political statements. I looked at them in detail, and they are anything but. Every example of a microaggression listed there makes very much sense, and I am disappointed about your general dismissal of these issues and that you failed to put yourself in the shoes of people who are affected by such comments.”
“I also think that leaving behind a chalkboard message like you did is not a benign thing to do. Think about how people who see this might react. They don’t know who wrote this; it might be a faculty member, grad student or anyone else. The implicit message is, ‘Don’t you dare bringing [sic] up nonsense like microaggressions, or else.’ This is upsetting, and can even be perceived as threatening,” Schmidt claimed. “Finally, I was disappointed at your response during our conversation. Everyone makes mistakes, and I’m all for forgiveness if actions are followed by honest regret. But you very much defended your actions, and stated clearly that you are not interested in any kind of diversity training.”
Schmidt added that, in his opinion, Hiers’ “actions and response are not compatible with the values of this department,” so he declined to renew the professor’s employment.
Heirs filed a lawsuit against the university shortly after, which the university tried to have dismissed, claiming Hiers’ message somehow did not constitute protected speech.
But Judge Sean Jordan recently ruled that Hiers’ lawsuit could move forward, and that he could continue to personally sue Schmidt and another professor involved in the decision not to renew his contract. Jordan wrote that Hiers “has plausibly alleged First Amendment violations based on retaliation, viewpoint discrimination, unconstitutional conditions compelled speech, and as-applied overbreadth.”
“Preserving the ‘freedom to think as you will and to speak as you think’ is both an inherent good, and an abiding goal of our democracy,” Jordan wrote.
“The university officials allegedly flouted that core principle of the First Amendment when they discontinued Hiers’ employment because of his speech,” the federal judge added. “Accepting the allegations as true, the Court concludes that Hiers plausibly alleged that the university officials violated his right to freedom of speech.”