The Volokh Conspiracy
Mostly law professors | Sometimes contrarian | Often libertarian | Always independent
Notre Dame Pro-Abortion-Rights Professor Loses Libel Lawsuit Against Student Newspaper
Prof. Tamara Kay, a sociology professor at Notre Dame, sued a student newspaper (The Irish Rover) for libel. Prof. Kay's position was apparently that these statements—in an October article, a March article, and a Tweet regarding the October article—"were not made in good faith and with a reasonable basis in law and fact" (see also the Complaint):
- Keough School Professor Offers Abortion Access to Students
- Abortion assistance offered to students despite IN law, ND policy
- Notre Dame Professors Help Students Obtain Abortions
- Kay used this panel as a platform…complementing her work to bring abortion to Notre Dame students.
- The letter "J" on office doors denotes Notre Dame professors who are willing to help students access abortion.
- Much of Kay's efforts to help students obtain abortion services…
In yesterday's Kay v. Irish Rover Inc., Judge Steven David (St. Joseph County, Indiana) held that the statements were basically accurate, and as a result granted defendant's "anti-SLAPP" motion to dismiss; an excerpt:
On September 15, 2022, Indiana S.B.1 took effect, limiting abortion in Indiana, although the law was enjoined shortly thereafter.
In addition, on the same day, Dr. Kay affixed a poster to her office door that read: "This is a SAFE SPACE to get help and information on ALL healthcare issues and access –confidentially and with care and compassion. My non-ND email is reprohealthahumanright@pm.me." Dr. Kay also put a J surrounded by a circle on her door.
Around this same time, Dr. Kay tweeted: "Such a devastating day to be a woman in IN. But women faculty @NotreDame are organizing. We are here (as private citizens, not representatives of ND) to help you access healthcare when you need it, & we are prepared in every way. Look for the "J" Spread the word to students!"
Dr. Kay also tweeted links to organizations providing Plan B and Plan C abortifacient pills. Both Abortion Finder and Catholics for Choice provide information on how to receive reimbursement for costs for traveling out of state for abortion and how to get abortion pills by mail and describe what the woman will have to do if her state does not legally permit such abortions.
The Catholics for Choice tweet publicized a Twitter account "@PlanCpills," which provides a guide for abortion pills by mail in all 50 States and encourages women to "Get Abortion Pills Now, Just In Case." See id. Dr. Kay's September 16, 2022, tweet, in which she shared photos of "Need to be un-pregnant" stickers with QR codes that led to "PlanCPills.org," preceded by the text, "DM me if you want some physical stickers. A lot have been ordered. Sharing information is still legal in Indiana!"
The J symbol, which was on Dr. Kay's door, was commonly understood by some people on Notre Dame's campus, and some people outside Notre Dame to symbolize those who were upset about abortion bans/or fighting for abortion rights/access.
Dr. Kay maintained that the "J" in the tweet was only meant to indicate that she was an advocate for victims of sexual assault. The Court finds that the "J" on Dr. Kay's door, particularly when read in context with the other words and statements on her door, and her statements and tweets and work that was being done contemporaneous to this relevant time, can most reasonably mean to infer something much broader than just being an advocate for victims of sexual assault but was being used, in conjunction with the other statements on the door, and her other statements, tweets, writings and social media, to identify her as one who is "willing to help students access abortions," including abortion pills, as well as assist victims of sexual violence. This is consistent with her position on abortion as set forth in her articles and social media communications.
The Court finds that the reference to "All healthcare issues and access" on Dr. Kay's door refers to global health care issues, including access to abortion, including abortion pills, not just assistance for victims of sexual violence….
Dr. Kay spoke at a panel event called "Post-Roe America: Making Intersectional Feminist Sense of Abortion Bans" on September 21, 2022. Mr. DeReuil [then editor of the Irish Rover] attended and recorded the Post-Roe panel, as part of his research for writing the October Article. After the panel concluded, DeReuil approached Dr. Kay and introduced himself as the Editor of The Irish Rover. He proceeded to interview Dr. Kay for 20 minutes, recording the interview to verify quotes later on, in compliance with Indiana's one-party consent recording law….
The Court finds that the October Article reasonably accurately quoted and summarized Dr. Kay's poster on her office door, her social media posts, and her public statements, including at the Post-Roe event….
The Court finds that the March Article accurately quoted and accurately summarized the interactions between Dr. Kay and students at [a] College Democrats meeting, which were largely centered on Dr. Kay's work on abortion rights and the related issue of academic freedom at Notre Dame for students and professors….
Dr. Kay's work in support of victims of sexual violence is to be applauded and praised and her advocating for abortion rights should not be condemned or result in threats against her person or property.
The subject of abortion is a difficult conversation for most Americans and many have strong opinions on the subject which can't always be reconciled, but we are a nation of ideas and opinions and our democratic form of government provides for free speech and the citizens of our country must be able to have the difficult discussions on controversial matters with respect for the opinions of others and with respect for the individual expressing those opinions. We cannot survive as a nation without civil public discourse. Disagreement should not translate into contempt or hatred.
It is unreasonable to confine Dr. Kay's work on sexual violence from being entirely separate from her work on abortion rights and abortion access. The Defendant's interpretation of her writings, statements, door material, and other forms of communication have to be taken together in context.
Dr. Kay supports assistance for women of sexual violence and Dr. Kay supports abortion rights and support for abortion information and access. While she should be able to make any statements she wants about anything she wants, she cannot pick or choose what she meant or which subject she was speaking about or writing about at her discretion….
Dr. Kay alleges her property was vandalized on two occasions. That is very unfortunate, inexcusable, and reprehensible…. The Court finds that there is no evidence that the vandalism of her property was linked in any way to the Articles.
Dr. Kay provided copies of "threatening" emails she received. However, the Court finds that there is no evidence that these threatening emails were linked in any way to the Articles.
Dr. Kay expressed her first amendment right to freedom of speech…. However, she cannot voluntarily put herself into the national abortion issue either on the campus of Notre Dame or in a broader, national forum, by making multiple strong statements in favor of abortion rights and access to abortion and expect that it will not become newsworthy at Notre Dame and elsewhere. The Court finds that there is a reasonable basis in fact for describing Dr. Kay as "willing to help students access abortion," as providing "abortion assistance," or "offers abortion access to student," and as "posting offers to procure abortion pills on her office door," and other substantively similar statements…..
Jim Bopp and Melena Siebert (The Bopp Law Firm) represent Irish Rover.
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. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
The link to the complaint is double-pasted -- https:/reason.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/KayvIrishRoverComplaint.pdf works.
Fixed, thanks!
Bigoted, superstition-addled, obsolete culture war casualties have rights, too.
Don't ever change, Reverend.
The good guys win one.
The dumb c*nt should be fired -- that is a purported Catholic university...
Class act as always, Dr. Ed.
What is going on with you calling women cunts - full on gendering the slur - but then censoring it?
What knife-edge of acceptability do you think you're on?
You've already pegged the needle on being an awful human, basically alienating everyone except the committed contrarians, so why not just go full slur?
Hey, we should count our blessings (no pun intended) that he didn't call for her to be murdered.
Can anyone here remember a day that did not feature plenty of bigoted content -- from Prof. Volokh's vile racial slurs and trans fetish to his right-winger readership's incessant stream of gay-bashing, immigrant-hating, misogynistic, racist, Islamophobic, antisemitic content -- at the Volokh Conspiracy?
A single day? Anyone?
Can anyone remember one of the Volokh Conspirators objecting to the bigotry that is published every day at their site?
A single one? Ever?
Carry on, clingers. So far as . . . well, you know.
I agree with Sarcastr0, and I've mentioned it directly to the initial commenter -- please avoid using vulgar insults in the comments (expurgated or otherwise). They tend to needlessly poison the conversation, and they interfere with your argument more than advancing it.
Of course, just to avoid confusion, mentioning vulgarities when quoting court filings, facts of an incident, precedents, etc. is a completely different matter; I view that as perfectly legitimate, and don't either use or insist that others use expurgation as to them. But of course the comment we're discussing involved the use of "cunt" (albeit expurgated) as an insult, not a quote or a mention.
My British friends call everyone they don't like a cunt, male or female. It doesn't seem to have the same connotation that it does over here, that a woman is no more than her sexual organs.
That aspect of British culture really is weird when I hear it, as an American.
In Ashley's "Book of Knots" cuntlines refer to the spaces between strands that make up rope, hence 3-strand rope has 3 cuntlines.
I was trying to figure out why Professor Kay complained so much about the articles. Her complaint didn’t state what struck me as the most plausible potential allegation – that The Irish Rover was accusing her of committing a crime. She just stated that the articles were false.
She also didn’t say very much about why they damaged her relutation. Clearly they made some important university and alumni folks angry at her. Perhaps it made some people talk about wanting to fire her. But I don’t see how that’s actually damaging to the reputation of a professor known for controversial and (in this particular university) unpopular opinions. At least the kind of reputational interests that defamation law protects. After all, there are certainly parts of academia where not only would her opinions and statements be welcome, but the opposite opinions would give rise to calls for firing.
It is a little strange for her to be so publicly pro-abortion, and then complain when someone says she is pro-abortion. Isn't she proud of her political and social justice stands? Who would not be proud of killing babies?
"Catholics for Choice" is contradictory.
No one is a Catholic because they say they are. They are Catholic because they strive to live the teachings of the faith. A fundamental teaching of Catholicism is that life begins at conception.
I wonder how much of RoCaMBLA's fervent opposition to abortion and contraception spring from fear that its priests will run short of altar boys to diddle.
Dr. Ed got called out for calling Dr. Kay a cunt. You should get called out for this, which is similarly uncalled for. Guilty as charged, sir.