Due Process

Professor Who Faced Attempted Blackmail Over Flirty Emails Now Suing University of New Mexico For Suspending Him

An attorney for Nick Flor says calls his effective termination "unfathomable."

|

Nick Flor, whose one-year suspension for alleged sexual misconduct was first reported here at Reason, is now suing the University of New Mexico for mishandling the matter.

"It is just unfathomable to me that a tenured professor could have this type of suspension—it's essentially a termination—and have no hearing at all," Flor's attorney, Nicholas Hart, told The Albuquerque Journal.

Flor's trouble began in May of 2018, when "Julia," a graduate student in her thirties, introduced herself to him in the printer room of the university's Anderson School of Management. (I have changed her name to protect her privacy.) They soon began exchanging texts and emails, which gradually became flirtatious and then sexual in nature.

Flor, who is married, realized he had made a mistake and tried to desexualize their relationship. He also offered Julia a low-paid summer research position, which she declined. (At no point did Julia either work for Flor or take one of his classes.) Julia grew disappointed that he was not taking their relationship more seriously, and she threatened to publicize the more embarrassing messages. Flor thus felt he had no choice but to report the matter to the administration. But a sexual misconduct investigation deemed that he was in the wrong, not Julia. The university suspended Flor without pay for a full year.

The Foundation for Individual Rights in Education's Samantha Harris called the school's treatment of Flor "one of the most egregious cases of university malfeasance" she had ever seen. The professor did not receive a hearing, nor he was afforded any opportunity to present witnesses on his behalf.

The lawsuit, which was filed last week, seeks a temporary restraining order to prevent his suspension from going into effect until the case is resolved. A university spokesperson did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Advertisement

NEXT: John Bolton Says He Would Comply With Senate Subpoena to Testify in Impeachment Trial

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. (I have changed her name to protect her privacy.)

    Public service announcement.

    1. I wish they would just come right out and say they won’t publish her name because she’s bat shit insane and they don’t want to be sued (and they don’t have much of a spine).

      1. I don’t know if it’s fear of a litigation. Reason has gone to legal bat for us dumbass commenters before. Perhaps it’s journalistic standards that fit this situation. I don’t see it but what do I know.

        1. Reason has gone to legal bat for us dumbass commenters before.

          Yeah, but other than Hihn, the rest of us are just shit-talkers who bust each others’ balls.

          I can see this being a form of CYA from a legitimately crazy person, and I honestly don’t blame them in this situation.

        2. I don’t know if it’s fear of a litigation. Reason has gone to legal bat for us dumbass commenters before. Perhaps it’s journalistic standards that fit this situation.

          Apples and cucumbers. You don’t fear the predator that you aren’t aware is stalking you, you just flinch defensively when it pounces and do your best to defend yourself. Similarly, you give a wide berth to the groaning wolf with it’s leg caught in a trap.

          It’s not fear of litigation. They have no problem definitively saying Trump colluded with Russians and Kavanaugh sexually assaulted someone. It’s fundamentalist SJW/civil libertarian mumbo-jumbo masquerading as journalistic integrity. They don’t have the integrity to say that they don’t have all the facts and don’t want to tell her half of the story and/or say what they’re reporting is factual and her name, whatever it is, is irrelevant to the facts.

  2. But a sexual misconduct investigation deemed that he was in the wrong, not Julia.

    One wonders the outcome of that investigation if the sexes were reversed. Do they have an equivalent saying for that? Like, “Hell hath no fury like a male graduate student scorn’d.”

  3. when “Julia,”

    Here we go again.

    Julia grew disappointed that he was not taking their relationship more seriously, and she threatened to publicize the more embarrassing messages.

    It’s good to know everyone else is going to extreme lengths to protect her privacy.

  4. I’d sure like to know what line of study “Julia” was in. That way I can better judge how dumb Flor was for ever saying “good morning” to her.

    1. Probably MBA, although it wouldn’t surprise me if she had some stupid grievance or social science degree from her undergrad days.

      1. I can’t imagine that both isn’t an option. Considering social engineering degrees at even engineering-heavy, rural, land-grant schools, I can’t imagine there’s not at least one MBA/Women’s studies dual or combined degree program in every state.

  5. He also offered Julia a low-paid summer research position, which she declined.

    I would say that if Flor made any mistake of an official, procedural nature, this was it.

  6. Time to close all universities for two years. Tell all the students to learn to do electrical or carpentry stuff and earn enough to pay off their existing debts. (do NOT learn to code)
    Then when the schools open up again, with all federal loan programs ended, they can pick a school that actually teaches.
    And for those who cannot live without federal edicts, restrict all schools to a classroom teacher to all other employees ratio of only one ‘other’ for each 7 real teachers.

    1. That’s a interesting idea which needs exploration, what with all this talk of writing off all school debt.

      Perhaps write it off in exchange for living in a barracks and working; get whatever job you can, live in a barracks, commute by prison-style bus, and all the money you make goes to pay off your school debt.

      Perhaps something similar for those who feel in the need of slavery / female/ LGBT reparations: work for the people who sponsor those reparations, live in a barracks, ad there’s your reparations.

    2. “restrict all schools to a classroom teacher to all other employees ratio of only one ‘other’ for each 7 real teachers.”

      You may want to consider an exception to that for “housekeeping”/janitorial services.

  7. Hurrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr employees shouldn’t have any protections. Businesses can do whatever they want durrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr.

    What a life it’d be if everybody got the privileges libertarians wants to give to kiddie fuckers, illegal beaners and sex predators.

    1. Interesting take.

  8. Folks who didn’t read the original article from Soave should probably check it out. It includes a lot more detail that makes the school’s treatment of him particularly egregious.

    Among other things, they ruled that him reporting a blackmail attempt was the wrong thing for him to do.

  9. This must be “Julia” from Obama’s “The Life of Julia”?

  10. Is anybody else’s ‘Recommended video’ at the end of the article an ironic ad for The Grudge?

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.