Free Speech

UCLA Lecturer Gordon Klein Suing UCLA Over Controversy Related to E-Mail Rejecting Student Request for Exam "Leniency" for "Black Students"

|

The case is Klein v. Bernardo, filed Monday.

1. Plaintiff Gordon Klein ("Plaintiff"), a professor at the University of California, Los Angeles ("UCLA" or "University"), was severely punished by UCLA after he refused to implement a different grading policy solely for black students.

2. This dispute originated in June 2020 when a non-black student asked Plaintiff to grade his "Black classmates" differently than other students. Plaintiff rejected this request, knowing that his employment contract – and California law – required him to apply the same grading standards and requirements to all students. He also refused because his faculty supervisor recently had encouraged instructors to reject requests for special exam accommodations.

3. After Plaintiff's email reply to the student was posted on social media, some furious individuals called Plaintiff "woefully racist" and organized an online campaign to attack Plaintiff and the UCLA Anderson School of Management ("Anderson School"), where Plaintiff teaches. The Anderson School hastily buckled under this pressure and sought permission from the University to impose disciplinary sanctions on Plaintiff, including terminating his employment. But, as noted below, the University rebuffed the Anderson School, warning that "the School may not take any action … at this time" against Plaintiff.

4. Despite this firm directive, the Anderson School administration abruptly suspended Plaintiff from his teaching duties, banned him from its campus, and hired others to replace him in future scheduled courses. Moreover, the Dean of the Anderson School, Defendant Antonio Bernardo ("Bernardo"), disparaged Plaintiff to alumni and the general public based on the private communications between Plaintiff and the student who had requested preferential race-based grading policies ("Student"). Dean Bernardo even went so far as to publicly disclose the adverse personnel action the School had improperly imposed on Plaintiff.

5. After examining the facts, the University eventually closed its investigation and reinstated Plaintiff. Later, the UCLA Senate Committee on Academic Freedom criticized the Anderson School administration, noting that it had violated Plaintiff's rights and, more broadly, that such conduct "chills" instructors from expressing views that differ from prevailing campus orthodoxy.

6. Plaintiff brings this action not only to redress the wrongful conduct he has endured but also to protect academic freedom….

For more on the controversy, see here, here, and here.

NEXT: Today in Supreme Court History: September 29, 2005

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 am glad to see that some good sense remains in the administration of my former university.

    1. Possibly. But EV’s recital recites that :

      Later, the UCLA Senate Committee on Academic Freedom criticized the Anderson School administration, noting that it had violated Plaintiff’s rights and, more broadly, that such conduct “chills” instructors from expressing views that differ from prevailing campus orthodoxy.

      Conspicuously absent is anything about the relevant members of the Anderson School administration, including the Dean, now having to stand on LA street corners, wielding squeegees. Wikipedia seems to think Herr Bernardo is still in charge.

      I’m struggling to think of a private company where :

      (a) you could formally ask your boss if you could do something,
      (b) the boss formally replies “No you can’t and anyway it’s illegal. Do not touch it.”
      (c) and then you go right ahead and do it anyway, thereby landing your company in a lawsuit and
      (d) still be in a job

      If the Anderson folk are still drawing paychecks, UCLA is only going though the motions.

      1. Or it could be a matter that their employment contract doesn’t allow for being fired for this and the university is honoring that even as the school admins try to break it for someone else.

        1. A provision in an employment contract that prohibits people from being fired for illegal actions — that they were specifically advised against — would seem to violate public policy, and thus be void. Or at least voidable.

          1. Most employment contracts spell out the specific types of illegal conduct you can be fired for (typically conviction/nolo contendere for felonies, or misdemeanors that involves dishonesty or moral turpitude). Accordingly, there is a goodly swath of illegal conduct for which an employee could not be fired, at least “for cause.”

            1. Those sorts of provisions pertain to crimes unrelated to one’s job. Can you be fired for cause for bank robbery, yes; for DUI, maybe; for littering, no. But no employment contract in history has ever limited the ability of an employer to fire someone for committing crimes in the course of his or her official duties on the job.

              1. What, do police unions not rate a mention here?

                1. Come on, cowardly shooting people because they could theoretically have guns isn’t a crime when police do it.

                  1. How about when you direct police to not pursue a fellow who used to work as an investigator for the DA’s office, after the fellow was involved in shooting someone to death in an event that was recorded on video?

                    1. The video revealed obvious self defense.

                  2. Or could theoretically possess a bomb. Hence the murder of Ashli Babbitt earned plaudits.

        2. Even if the dean cannot be fired, the dean can be removed from hir position.

          1. “hir”

            Please tell me that’s a typo and you didn’t look up Bernardo’s preferred pronouns.

            1. No, it is not a typo. I prefer it to his/her and I was too lazy to look up the dean’s name.

          2. Personally, having read the three prior VC posts on this, I think the student was being ‘asininely woke’ and Professor Klein (who evidently has a brain) was having none of that. I have more intemperate emails in my inbox every morning by 0500 than that kid will ever get…heh, heh.

            No harm ‘final’? Do we really do that shit in real life? By all means, if any of you do, please hire me immediately. I’d like to test out that ‘no harm’ final thing in the workplace on your dime. 🙂

            The student (a pupil would be a more technically correct term) needed a wake up call delivered in the form of an email. Hopefully, the pupil will learn.

      2. Could be true, Lee. The message would be more convincing if the dean of the Anderson School were publicly sanctioned.

      3. Ordinarily deans and other administrators hold their positions at the pleasure of their superiors. They can be fired from their administrative jobs without cause, but they retain their tenured jobs; they just go back to being faculty.

      4. “I’m struggling to think of a private company where :

        (a) you could formally ask your boss if you could do something,
        (b) the boss formally replies “No you can’t and anyway it’s illegal. Do not touch it.”
        (c) and then you go right ahead and do it anyway, thereby landing your company in a lawsuit and
        (d) still be in a job”

        The Trump Organization comes to mind.

        1. Is that just a rando allegation or do you have an instance you can point to?

  2. It is racist to not be racist.
    Doublethink?

    1. Lathering the rubes
      Lathering the rubes
      The right-wing law professor
      Lathering his rubes

    2. Merely the predictable end result of unprincipled people pushing an agenda for personal gain.

      1. Speaking of unprincipled, Artie tries to be amusing and fails yet again.

        1. The Rev. thinks he’s owning the clingers.

          1. He expects to have a good laugh in the period between the ‘clingers’ getting shipped off to the camps, and his following them.

  3. So a leftist student decided his fellow students were too stupid to pass and then turned the professor against them in an attempt to inflate grades. Result a net loss for everyone. Lesson, leftist ideology fails every time.

    1. Exactly. The fascist that started this all believes that Black students are unable to compete on a level playing field – or that their mere presence will so affect the white students that they, the white students will be disadvantaged.

      Farfetched? Unless and until the reporting student can be questioned we will never know.

      1. Fascist?

        LOL. Don’t use words when you don’t know their meanings.

    2. Or, right wing student sets up a professor to look racist just to pwn the lefties and watch them eat themselves in an anti-racist frenzy.

      This could have easily been a troll.

      1. To whom, exactly, does this “look racist”?

        Thanks for your suggestion in your email below that I give black students special treatment, given the tragedy in Minnesota. Do you know the names of the classmates that are black? How can I identify them since we’ve been having online classes only? Are there any students that may be of mixed parentage, such as half black-half Asian? What do you suggest I do with respect to them? A full concession or just half? Also, do you have any idea if any students are from Minneapolis? I assume that they probably are especially devastated as well. I am thinking that a white student from there might be possibly even more devastated by this, especially because some might think that they’re racist even if they are not. My TA is from Minneapolis, so if you don’t know, I can probably ask her. Can you guide me on how you think I should achieve a “no-harm” outcome since our sole course grade is from a final exam only? One last thing strikes me: Remember that MLK famously said that people should not be evaluated based on the “color of their skin.” Do you think that your request would run afoul of MLK’s admonition? Thanks, G. Klein

  4. Even assuming everything in the complaint, how does this case survive? The wrongful decision has already been overturned and he has already been reinstated by the very people that he’s suing.

    (For those without a playbook, he was fired by the Anderson School. He was reinstated by the parent legal entity. For technical reasons, he can’t sue just the Anderson School but has to sue the parent legal entity as responsible for their subordinates.)

    Okay, at the bottom of the complaint he asks for money but I’m not sure what damages he will be able to prove since, as already noted, the bad decision has already been overturned and his reputation – if not fully restored, is at least as vindicated as it ever will be.

    1. The professor had a side job as being an expert witness which dried up because of it. In the lawsuit, the professor is asking for compensatory and punitive damages as allowed for by California statute.

      The flagrantly illegal nature of the actions by the School might warrant some significant punitive damages alone.

      1. Hmmm… Economic losses from the side business is at least tangible though proving causation will be a challenge. Punitive damages against the same parent entity that exonerated him, though? That doesn’t seem like good public policy.

        1. But can’t the same be said of any suit of government agencies? Much like suing the police will result in awards paid not by bad cops but by the taxpaying community at large.

          It would be best if he could sue the responsible actors or at least hit the law school’s budget directly but that doesn’t seem to be allowed.

          1. Whoops, wrong sub-school.

        2. Punitive damages against the same parent entity that exonerated him, though?

          As someone with a name very similar to yours just noted…

          he can’t sue just the Anderson School but has to sue the parent legal entity as responsible for their subordinates.

          1. Yes, that’s the point I’m struggling with. A is responsible for B. A does something wrong. B fixes it on their own. B gets sued anyway.
            1. What does that do to the future incentives for Bs to fix problems?
            2. No matter how bad A was, how do you support punitive damages? Punitives are supposed to prevent recurrences of the bad thing – but B already stopped the bad thing.

            1. Not quite what this case is.

              B is an agent/subsidiary of A.
              B does something wrong to C.
              A partly reverses B’s action, but this does not completely cure the harms suffered by C.
              C sues A

              Going back to your lettering.
              1 I would say B ought to have an incentive to prevent wrong acts by A, not just fixing A’s wrong acts case by case after the fact.
              2. “but B already stopped the bad thing.” No. B corrected one particular bad act by A, I don’t see where they have done anything to prevent A from doing the same bad thing again in the future.

  5. Remember that the School claimed it suspended Klein not for refusing the request, but for the tone of his email reply that was alleged to be condescending to the point of offensiveness. You can read it for yourself in the first of the articles EV links to.

    1. Right. Eugene allows the complaint to, shall we say, obscure the facts here. I wonder why?

      1. Yeah, I’ve read the email. It was sarcastic, but at a level that would leave your average 5 year old girl unfazed.

        1. Indeed, you can see it in my initial post (which I linked to from this one). My sense is that university instructors (especially at UCLA) would never be treated by their departments like Klein was treated based simply on a somewhat argumentative and sarcastic response to a student e-mail (as opposed to the political viewpoint that Klein was expressing). But if UCLA has some counterexamples, I’d love to see them.

          1. Perhaps the sole thing Klein could have done to improve that email would have been to include a vile racial slur?

          2. If UCLA stops hiring movement conservatives, it might be able to devote less time to (1) apologizing for its employees’ conduct and (2) addressing lawsuits from disaffected, poorly behaving employees.

          3. That doesn’t speak well of UCLA, does it?

            1. That they won’t censure professors for responding to stupid woketards with a little bit of sarcasm?

              1. I’d characterize it more as, “Not censuring professors who throw petty little hissy-fits when they get silly requests from students, rather than in a professional way designed to provide further instruction and guidance.”

                College students are barely adults. They’re just getting the hang of things. Professors are educational professionals, with years of experience working with hundreds of students, and should understand that sometimes that means channeling immaturity in a more constructive direction.

                1. Not seeing the following as a hissy-fit:

                  Thanks for your suggestion in your email below that I give black students special treatment, given the tragedy in Minnesota. Do you know the names of the classmates that are black? How can I identify them since we’ve been having online classes only? Are there any students that may be of mixed parentage, such as half black-half Asian? What do you suggest I do with respect to them? A full concession or just half? Also, do you have any idea if any students are from Minneapolis? I assume that they probably are especially devastated as well. I am thinking that a white student from there might be possibly even more devastated by this, especially because some might think that they’re racist even if they are not. My TA is from Minneapolis, so if you don’t know, I can probably ask her. Can you guide me on how you think I should achieve a “no-harm” outcome since our sole course grade is from a final exam only? One last thing strikes me: Remember that MLK famously said that people should not be evaluated based on the “color of their skin.” Do you think that your request would run afoul of MLK’s admonition? Thanks, G. Klein

        2. I’m not comparing the professor’s response to the kind of invective you’d love to levy against people you disagree with, Brett. I’m evaluating it as the unprofessional and embarrassingly juvenile missive that it is.

          I once had the displeasure of corresponding with a former law professor of mine, as a fully established professional in my own right. In response to a polite chaser after a couple of emails were entirely disregarded, she lashed out in a similarly unprofessional and presumptuous way – like it was somehow my fault for not anticipating how she might manage her overwhelming number of emails.

          They don’t seem to develop much of a thick skin, these professors. The ones who never leave the undergrad-law school-clerkship conveyor belt, in particular, apparently never learn professional decorum. Josh is a striking example; he can’t even do his fellow co-conspirators the favor of not flooding the page with his trifling nonsense when they have pieces they want to get out.

          1. When is EV finally going to give Josh the gift of his very own blog that he can have all to himself is what I want to know.

          2. Look, the people who are at the school to develop are the students. And a thick skin is one of the things they should be developing. Instead we’re giving them every incentive to flay themselves, and walk about all exposed nerve endings.

            And you wouldn’t need very thick skin to endure that email. It was more gumming sarcasm than biting. The student was suggesting he act illegally. Given that, the response was mild, and precisely on point.

            1. So now you’re defending a professor’s churlish response because students need a bit of abuse?

              The “thick skin” you think students go to school to develop is developed in the course of getting bad grades for sub-par work, suffering through all-nighters due to procrastination, being challenged by difficult ideas in class, and so on. It’s not developed by having the professors be churlish dicks when you make an absurd request for favorable treatment. Those types of professors teach the wrong lesson and don’t promote the broader mission of learning.

              1. I don’t see any reason a prof being asked for something obviously illegal shouldn’t be a churlish dick. Not that I’d characterize the email that way, he could have been a lot more vicious than just pointing out the obvious problems with the proposal.

                Basically you’re complaining that he didn’t coddle a student who was requesting an illegal act.

              2. Does the sanction of being suspended from your job, banned from campus, and (arguably) defamed as a racist seem appropriate as a remedy for ‘chirlishness’?

                I mean, sure the guy could have replied with something like ‘California state law (citation of section/part/whatever) prohibits actions of the sort you are requesting, therefore your request is denied’

                But does his failure to do so measure up to the sanction he received?

                1. That’s a ridiculous question. The Prof’s response didn’t need any upgrading.

                  You’re giving the complaints against the Prof way too much credit for not being lunacy.

              3. Again, Simon-the-Jackass churlishly continues to mischaracterize the professor’s mildly sarcastic response. Pixels are cheap, so I will repeat again what said allegedly “churlish response” consisted of:

                Thanks for your suggestion in your email below that I give black students special treatment, given the tragedy in Minnesota. Do you know the names of the classmates that are black? How can I identify them since we’ve been having online classes only? Are there any students that may be of mixed parentage, such as half black-half Asian? What do you suggest I do with respect to them? A full concession or just half? Also, do you have any idea if any students are from Minneapolis? I assume that they probably are especially devastated as well. I am thinking that a white student from there might be possibly even more devastated by this, especially because some might think that they’re racist even if they are not. My TA is from Minneapolis, so if you don’t know, I can probably ask her. Can you guide me on how you think I should achieve a “no-harm” outcome since our sole course grade is from a final exam only? One last thing strikes me: Remember that MLK famously said that people should not be evaluated based on the “color of their skin.” Do you think that your request would run afoul of MLK’s admonition? Thanks, G. Klein

      2. I guess that’s why we’re here, to restore balance.

        This lawsuit is the latest in an unfortunate sequence of overreactions.

        1. I’m really tired of Klein’s more cuckish “defenders” implicitly accepting the proposition that he did something wrong for which he has merely been overpunished. The prof’s email was not an “overreaction”. Full stop.

    2. “Thank you for your thought-provoking letter. I will be sure to give it the attention it deserves.”

      1. It wasn’t “thought-provoking”. It was contempt-provoking. There was nothing wrong with Klein indicating that.

  6. Someone who only has one exam at the end of the course is a lazy ass teacher.

    1. Where does it say that this was the only exam? The described “no-harm” policy implies that there were other exams or graded work.

      FWIW, a single exam at the end of the term, on which one’s entire grade depends, would be the norm in law school. I defer to the Conspirators as to whether the typical law professor is fairly characterized as “lazy ass.”

      1. All I’m saying is *if* the only feedback that is provided is once at the end, I’m not sure that’s a good way of teaching.

        1. The result of a lot of legal work comes down to a single decision at the end of a lengthy and difficult process, with little-to-no feedback on how it’s going up until that point. Not unreasonable to teach in a similar manner.

          1. Ok, but this isn’t a law school. It’s a business school.

            Likewise, the “tone” of his email would seem to be appropriate when directed at a law student: “Here are some things to consider: have you thought them all through and do you have solutions to propose?”

            Not sure if such a legalistic response is appropriate for the course he’s teaching, but demanding he be fired for it is a huge over reaction.

            1. The response was not “legalistic.”

              The response was nit-picky, strawmanny whataboutism. The rhetorical purpose of the litany of counter-examples is to overwhelm and confuse the recipient, not to make any coherent argument against the proposal.

              All the dude needed to say was, “sorry, the requested accommodation might well be illegal.” If he wanted to be a good professor, he would have offered opportunities to provide additional instruction or guidance, such as through expanded office hours, study sessions, additional classes, and so on.

              Instead he just takes the silly request as a personal affront, and scoffs that he should in any way be bothered by the unseemly events in Minneapolis. As if!

              1. Yeah, that was my take as well. He shouldn’t have gotten in trouble for it, but to the extent he was attempting to teach a teachable moment, he failed.

              2. The email is not so long as to let it be mischaracterized in absentia, as it is here by Simon-the-Prick.

                Thanks for your suggestion in your email below that I give black students special treatment, given the tragedy in Minnesota. Do you know the names of the classmates that are black? How can I identify them since we’ve been having online classes only? Are there any students that may be of mixed parentage, such as half black-half Asian? What do you suggest I do with respect to them? A full concession or just half? Also, do you have any idea if any students are from Minneapolis? I assume that they probably are especially devastated as well. I am thinking that a white student from there might be possibly even more devastated by this, especially because some might think that they’re racist even if they are not. My TA is from Minneapolis, so if you don’t know, I can probably ask her. Can you guide me on how you think I should achieve a “no-harm” outcome since our sole course grade is from a final exam only? One last thing strikes me: Remember that MLK famously said that people should not be evaluated based on the “color of their skin.” Do you think that your request would run afoul of MLK’s admonition? Thanks, G. Klein

            2. “this isn’t a law school. It’s a business school.”

              It’s not like b-school graduates will ever be working with law-school graduates.

          2. So what you’re saying is, students are not entitled to help from the instructor if they need it?

            1. “entitled” to? No.

          3. IMHO, a school for the autodidactic is no school at all.

          4. You are apparently not a lawyer.

      2. The Anderson School is the business school not the law school

      3. Yes. The typical law professor is fairly characterized as “lazy ass.”

        1. So also of b-school instructors.

      4. Where does it say that this was the only exam?

        From the complaint:

        Due to this online teaching format, Plaintiff no longer interacted with his students unless they
        asked questions by email or during group video “office hours.” Also, Plaintiff shifted to issuing
        course grades based entirely on students’ final exam performance.

        (I agree that this situation makes a request for a “no harm” final exam fairly ridiculous.

    2. Somebody’s consumed too many mushrooms…

    3. So all my law school professors were lazy ass teachers?

      1. It was a hasty generalization, but you get what I mean. It takes little effort to throw students in the water and see who swims the longest.

    4. Midterm, Final and possibly a term-paper was the ‘standard’ for undergad work 20 years ago for more-or-less anything that wasn’t a lab course… Have we been turning college into high-school with BS graded ‘homework’ and similar?

  7. So… was the student actually asking for special treatment for black students? As I read the email, it seems like he was asking for the special accommodations to be extended to everyone. Which is also ridiculous, of course (though at least not illegal).

    1. “These students circulated online a document entitled “Letter Writing for Finals Accommodations for Black Students.” This template asked professors to adopt grading policies that
      “exercise compassion and leniency with Black students.” In particular, according to the Student, an objective of this template was to encourage professors to give only black students optional, “no-harm” final exams. ”

      I haven’t found a copy of this document, have you got a link? But the title certainly sounds dubious.

      1. As described by the complaint, that demand (which was not delivered to plaintiff) expressly rejected by the administration. The plaintiff then received a request from one of his students (who describes himself as “non-Black”) asking to “to mandate that our final exam is structured as no-harm, where they will only benefit students’ grades if taken. In addition, we urgently request shortened exams and extended deadlines for final assignments and projects.” He further explains that “we have been placed in a position where we must choose between actively supporting our Black classmates or focusing on finishing up our Spring Quarter.” All of which reads to me more like a general request for an exemption for everyone. Though I note he later described the request as “an ask that you exercise compassion and leniency with Black students in our major” and apparently told the university later that he was asking or race-based special treatment, so maybe he’s just bad at expressing himself.

        1. I haven’t found a complete copy of the email anywhere, just partial quotes, but it seems clear from some of the sources, that there was in fact a demand for racially discriminatory grading later in that same email.

          “The letter further asked Klein to give high letter grades to black students in a course graded “on a curve.””

    2. “As I read the email, it seems like he was asking for the special accommodations to be extended to everyone.”

      It can happen. One of my semesters in law school, all scheduled final exams were shifted to unscheduled, and the deadline to complete them was extended into the following semester. The law school was on top of a hill, and the area had a foot of snow with an inch of freezing rain on top of it, and the temperature stayed below freezing for several weeks. It was extremely challenging for students who lived off-campus (which was all of them) to get to the school.

  8. The labor violation claims seems like the strong one. I don’t know how a court is supposed to find a college’s suspension of a teacher to be a private fact. I also don’t know how you’re going to show false light on a whole bunch of things that are ultimately opinions. The tortious interference claim seems pretty dumb too.

    I’m not sure what his remedy is beyond getting his merit pay raise unless the labor code provisions allows for non economic damages.

  9. To become heroes among clingers — including those who operate this White, male blog — the student(s) should have label that proposal a request for religious exemption.

  10. It seems good that Gordon Klein was reinstated.

    Stale-thinking people who author inappropriate e-mails (and not just the one encouraging a female student to hang out with him because ‘you are my favorite’) have rights, too.

    1. I’m afraid to ask what you’re referring to here.

      1. This authoritarian site permits but a single link.

        That seems to be either a damnable fake or a damning genuine article.

    2. The email you finally link to below https://3k7by215ywuf340yi3alsfso-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/5/2020/06/E0qlPjz.jpg actually only jokes about Klein telling multitudes that they are his favorite. But, disgusting liar that you are, you decided to begin by misleading.

  11. Although the professor should recover large damages, I note that sarcasm is the weapon of the weak, and that when you are in charge, a simple “I don’t think that’s feasible,” or no response at all, is the best way to respond to moronic requests.

    1. I note that sarcasm is the weapon of the weak

      Oh, yeah…sure it is.

    2. Sarcasm is perfectly fine when appropriate, as it was here. The clown who made the request is a student, and teaching him that he will be derided for exhibiting stupid lunacy may have a good didactic effect. Klein would have failed him with the responses you suggest.

  12. That original email is a trip. These are the people the Rev is always touting as the smart and sophisticated set. In reality, they’re just smug, obnoxious busybodies with a really bad case of Great White Savior’s Syndrome. Lord help us. You’d be lucky not to have them as neighbors.

    1. This is what happens when too many of your neighbors are clingers.

      (That also is the type of incident Prof. Volokh and his White, male, movement conservative blog tend to ignore.)

      1. I inadvertently — but, somehow, effectively — included two links in that one.

        Maybe the censor on duty at reason.com is a Who fan?

        (That version seems to emphasize the bass guitar performance, which is magnificent.)

        1. Kookland, your impression that including two links is not allowed is, like virtually everything you write, delusional.

  13. Look at all of you clingers who suggest that we should not look at a person’s skin color as a predictor of their ability. Your racist days are coming to an end.

    Did I do that correctly?

    1. It’s a good start, it just needs a touch more “smug”.

      1. Arty is Dunning-Kruger personified – on the left side of the curve.

    2. An admirable first effort. 🙂

    3. “Did I do that correctly?”

      Not quite.

  14. From the linked complaint, the causes of action are
    1. BREACH OF CONTRACT;
    2. VIOLATION OF RIGHT TO PRIVACY BY PUBLIC DISCLOSURE OF PRIVATE FACTS;
    3. VIOLATION OF RIGHT TO PRIVACY BY PLACING PLAINTIFF IN A FALSE LIGHT;
    4. RETALIATORY DISCRIMINATION IN VIOLATION OF LABOR CODE § 1102.5(c);
    5. COMMON LAW RETALIATION IN VIOLATION OF PUBLIC POLICY;
    6. NEGLIGENT INTERFERENCE WITH PROSPECTIVE ECONOMIC ADVANTAGE; AND
    7. BREACH OF EMPLOYER’S STATUTORY DUTY OF POLITICAL NEUTRALITY
    with punitive damages requested on counts 2, 3, and 5.

    Is negligent as opposed to intentional interference with economic advantage a recognized tort in California?

  15. Wow. I’m just so shocked these days. A professor was requested to perform an illegal and racist act, giving two grading scales based on race. It doesn’t matter if it’s a harder scale (failing students who should have passed) or an easier scale (passing students who should have failed), both are wrong. The former denies credentials to those who earned them, and the latter grants credentials to the unqualified, which is how we have black high school graduates who can’t read.

    Yet, his refusal to implement transparently racist measures is supposedly so racist that the school fired a tenured professor, which has traditionally been near-impossible.

    Up is down. Left is right. I don’t know what to think anymore.

    1. If there is anything the Volokh Conspiracy is good for, it is ensuring that Blacks (and women) stop getting away with the special treatment and favors that make life harder and so unfair for White males in modern America.

      Replacement will be your sole respite, clingers.

      1. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
        Waste of brain cells warning
        ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
        Kookland is performing his weird trick of “footnoting” his assertions with a music video. I didn’t follow it, but hovering over it shows “youtube”. So there’s no need to click on it.

        And then there’s his tiresomely triumphal crystal ball.

        That exhausts his bag of tricks. No use in saying “Roll over, boy!” That’s beyond his abilities.

        ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
        Waste of brain cells warning
        ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

    2. But Artie, never knew what to think.

    3. “Wow. I’m just so shocked these days. A professor was requested to perform an illegal and racist act”

      Hold on. What we know is that a professor said that a different professor* alleged in a lawsuit that the second professor was requested to perform an illegal and racist act. That’s two levels of indirection and in at least one of those levels, there is a clear reason to suspect biased reporting.

      * the second guy isn’t a professor. He’s a Lecturer. To academics, the difference is huge. It’s like addressing Gomer Pyle as “General”.

      1. In fact we know with great clarity that Klein was requested to perform an illegal and racist act. See upthread. Your determination to remain ignorant is not binding on others.

    4. “Yet, his refusal to implement transparently racist measures is supposedly so racist that the school fired a tenured professor, which has traditionally been near-impossible.

      Up is down. Left is right.”

      Lecturers are tenured? Up IS down.

  16. when a non-black student asked Plaintiff to grade his “Black classmates” differently than other students.

    The non-black student seems to be suffering from an irony deficiency. Wonder what the black students thought of the proposal.

    1. Depends on what the proposal actually was.
      Was it, “say, could you write your exam in such a way that it does not artificially discriminate against black people?” or was it “hey, why don’t you prop up any underperformers on your exam, like say if there’s a bunch of black students in your class?”

      The first one is not racist at all, and the second one is, if only casually. Appropriate responses to these would be different. If it was more like the first one, then investigation of the lecturer by management would have been appropriate. Either way, a denial of the request could have been written that justified investigation into the tone of the student interaction. (that is, a response that “I’ll grade the way I feel like it and you can just STFU if you don’t like it” is not the way the university would want a lecturer to respond to a request. Correct ways to handle it include “I’ll grade in accordance with university policy” and “I’ll forward your inquiry to the dean and see what (s)he says.”

      1. Your determined ignorance is showing again. The allegedly inappropriate reply is easy to locate, so why didn’t you do so befre bloviating at such great length about hypotheticals?

        Thanks for your suggestion in your email below that I give black students special treatment, given the tragedy in Minnesota. Do you know the names of the classmates that are black? How can I identify them since we’ve been having online classes only? Are there any students that may be of mixed parentage, such as half black-half Asian? What do you suggest I do with respect to them? A full concession or just half? Also, do you have any idea if any students are from Minneapolis? I assume that they probably are especially devastated as well. I am thinking that a white student from there might be possibly even more devastated by this, especially because some might think that they’re racist even if they are not. My TA is from Minneapolis, so if you don’t know, I can probably ask her. Can you guide me on how you think I should achieve a “no-harm” outcome since our sole course grade is from a final exam only? One last thing strikes me: Remember that MLK famously said that people should not be evaluated based on the “color of their skin.” Do you think that your request would run afoul of MLK’s admonition? Thanks, G. Klein

  17. An as yet anonymous “non-Black” student argues that Black students cannot succeed academically, and need to be gifted grades above that which is reflected by their work.

    Yet somehow this student avoids cancel culture?

    1. You’re quoting a summary of events as authoritative, when there is a small possibility it may be biased.

  18. Is this incident of any legitimate interest to anyone not employed by, or attending, the UCLA school of management?

  19. UCLA is exposing itself as a racist institution. Further, it shows the qualifications of any black graduate of UCLA, are suspect.

    Anyone that uses reason in choosing doctors, lawyers, or hiring professionals, knows that blacks are likely at the bottom of their class and should be avoided. That’s what UCLA is doing to it’s black students, while the punished professor is trying to stop it.

    Personally, I think UCLA should be closed, for its racism. At a minimum, the government should stop supporting it with grants, subsidies and other financial support. Otherwise, the State of California is telling us, it’s also a racist organization.

    Democrat run states: the old and new bastions of racism. Instead of the KKK, it’s now the socialist SJWs.

Please to post comments