‘Faculty rights and the sufficiency of law students’ education’ at risk
One of the worrisome trends in law-school education is students seeking to avoid uncomfortable areas of the law, particularly sexual assault.
But it was a law professor’s exam question on an uncomfortable area of the body that got him in trouble with his university. As in, 504 days of trouble, and potentially many more.
Howard University is hanging the Sword of Damocles over the head of Reginald Robinson if he ever offends a student again by the content of his legal pedagogy.
The historically black school in Washington, D.C., has yet to respond six months later to a warning letter from the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education about its year-plus Title IX investigation of Robinson (left) for an exam question on groping and drugging involving a Brazilian wax.
Though Robinson’s lawyer said this summer that they “believe we have reached a mutually satisfactory solution” in discussions with the university,” that resolution fell through, FIRE told Howard President Wayne Frederick in a Tuesday letter:
Robinson has now informed us that no agreement was finalized. Accordingly, as he plans to return to teaching next semester, his and other Howard professors’ free speech rights remain threatened. To our knowledge, the unjust sanctions against Robinson remain in place, including the threat of termination for protected expression simply because someone may find it offensive.
The letter from Susan Kruth, staff attorney for FIRE’s Stand Up For Speech Litigation Project, is copied to the chair of Howard’s board of trustees, its general counsel, provost and law school dean, as well as the Title IX investigator who investigated Robinson and Title IX coordinator:
Howard’s finding is at odds with the plain language of several written university policies and could chill professors’ teaching of basic legal principles. As a result, it puts at risk both faculty rights and the sufficiency of law students’ education.
Though Howard is private, it has two written policies that on their face apply to Robinson’s classroom conduct. One seems explicitly designed to encompass controversial legal subjects, from the Faculty Handbook, last updated 24 years ago:
Faculty members are entitled to freedom in the classroom in discussing their subjects, but they should be careful not to introduce matter into their teaching that has no relation to their subjects.
Another is less than a year old, directed to the entire community from President Frederick (in response to a political vandalism incident), though it explicitly prioritizes safety over freedom of speech:
Howard University is committed to the principles of free speech, public protest, and inclusivity, even though these ideals may sometimes conflict with one another. However, our commitment to the safety, well-being, and support of the Howard University community remains our highest priority.
Read FIRE’s letter to the university.
MORE: 504-day investigation of law professor for ‘Brazilian wax’ question
MORE: Howard vandalized with ‘Trump plantation’ after DeVos visit
IMAGE: ‘The 40-Year-Old-Virgin’
Please join the conversation about our stories on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Reddit, MeWe, Rumble, Gab, Minds and Gettr.