The Volokh Conspiracy
Mostly law professors | Sometimes contrarian | Often libertarian | Always independent
$725K Settlement in University of North Texas Academic Freedom Case
The case settled while motions for summary judgment were pending; the plaintiff, Prof. Timothy Jackson, had prevailed against an earlier motion to dismiss, and the Fifth Circuit had also rejected defendants' appeal as to procedural matters.
Here's a summary of the underlying legal issue, as reported in Jackson v. Wright, decided in 2022 by Judge Amos Mazzant (E.D. Tex.):
This case stems from the suppression of academic scholarship at the University of North Texas …. Plaintiff Dr. Timothy Jackson is a professor and scholar of music theory at UNT. He has dedicated much of his 40-year career to studying Heinrich Schenker …, an Austrian Jew who developed a system of music theory that became influential in the United States after World War II. Prior to this lawsuit, UNT was home to, and Plaintiff directed, the Center for Schenkerian Studies. Plaintiff was also a founding member of the Journal of Schenkerian Studies …, which was formerly published by the UNT Press.
Plaintiff's area of expertise became a topic of controversy in November 2019 at a convention of the Society for Music Theory. Philip Ewell, a Black professor at Hunter College of the City University of New York, delivered for the Society a plenary address titled "Music Theory's White Racial Frame." During this talk, Professor Ewell critiqued the discipline of music theory for its "deep-seated whiteness" and described Schenker as "an ardent racist and German nationalist." In a paper later published on this talk, Professor Ewell argued that "Schenkerian theory is an institutionalized racial structure … that exists to benefit members of the dominant white race of music theory."
As a lead editor of the Journal (of which Schenker is the namesake), Plaintiff … organized a symposium and invited music scholars to submit papers in response to Professor Ewell's talk and publication….
The symposium contributions reflected a range of views on Professor Ewell's arguments and were published in the Journal in July 2020. Plaintiff contributed one of the pieces, which accuses Professor Ewell of quoting Schenker without context, failing to discuss the evolution of Schenker's views on race during his lifetime, and refusing to acknowledge that Schenker was a victim of anti-Semitism.
Plaintiff also suggested Professor Ewell's criticisms of Schenker might themselves have constituted anti-Semitism. In support of this contention, Plaintiff cited studies purportedly classifying Black people as more likely to hold anti-Semitic views than whites. Plaintiff closed his article by asserting that the paucity of African American involvement in music theory discipline results from "few grow[ing] up in homes where classical music is profoundly valued, and therefore … lack[ing] the necessary background."
The backlash was swift. Professors across the country circulated emails and "led [a] social media charge" condemning the symposium. The Executive Board of the Society for Music Theory issued a letter, stating, among other things, "[t]he conception and execution of [the] symposium failed to meet the ethical, professional, and scholarly standards of our discipline." Further, a number of UNT graduate students circulated a statement (the "Student Statement") denouncing the Journal's "platforming of racist sentiments" and calling for potential removal of Plaintiff from the Journal for his "actions … both past and present" that were "particularly racist and unacceptable." One defendant in this case published the Student Statement on her Twitter feed.
In response, a majority of Plaintiff's colleagues in UNT's Division of Music History, Theory, and Ethnomusicology signed a letter endorsing the Student Statement and included a link for viewers to access it. In addition, John Richmond, Dean of the College of Music at UNT, announced the College of Music's launch of a "formal investigation into the conception and production of the twelfth volume of the Journal." UNT officials formed an ad hoc panel (the "Panel") to carry out this investigation….
[T]he Panel issued a report (the "Report") in which it found the Journal did not observe "the standards of best practice in scholarly publication" in producing Volume 12 and, accordingly, made recommendations the Journal was expected to implement…. A portion of the recommendations included: "1. Changing the editorial structure" of the Journal; "2. Making clear and transparent all editorial and review processes[; and] 3. Defining clearly the relationships between the [J]ournal editorial team and the editorial board." …
Dr. Brand, Chair of Plaintiff's department, "informed [Plaintiff] that he would be removed from the Journal and that the university would eliminate resources previously provided to the Journal and Center for Schenkerian Studies." …
Since then, the Journal has been "on ice." No editorial board currently exists, and no one has applied for the position of editor-in-chief. Because of this indefinite suspension, Plaintiff has been de facto removed from the Journal….
The court allowed Jackson's First Amendment claim against the University to go forward; the Fifth Circuit rejected an appeal related to procedural matters; summary judgment motions were filed and were pending; and the case has now settled. A quick summary of the settlement:
- The university is paying $725K; I am told that $400K of that will go to plaintiff and $325K will go to pay for his legal fees and costs.
- The plaintiff is dropping his First Amendment claim, as well as his defamation claims against various faculty members and a student; the defendants are not admitting guilt.
- The Journal will now resume publication, and plaintiff will continue to serve as editor of the Journal of Schenkerian Studies for the next five years; during the third year, he "shall appoint a co-editor, subject to approval of the editorial board, to serve as editor for a period of five (5) years after completion of Plaintiff's term."
- "UNT shall grant PLAINTIFF a one-course reduction from his teaching workload assignment during his service as editor of the JSS as previously granted and in accordance with UNT College of Music guidelines," and will appoint a half-time Research Assistant to support the journal.
- The Journal will be subject to the same "standards of editorial review" and similar policies as "[a]ll academic journals published or distributed by the University of North Texas Press."
Plaintiff is represented by Michael Allen and Samantha Harris (Allen Harris PLLC) and Jonathan Mitchell (Mitchell Law PLLC).
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 story here is not that the good guys won, but that it took $325K for the good guys to win.
Volokh and all plaintiff lawyers need to inform the plaintiff and other readers that payment of income tax is due on the entire $725K, since there was no physical injury. No deduction for lawyer fees. Failure to provide this publication is lack of informed consent, and lawyer malpractice, in my opinion. The income tax on $725K is $220K. The victim is really getting $180K. Given the time, stress, and grief, he would have been better off getting a job elsewhere. Now, he has the reputation of suing an employer. I doubt he would be hired to swab the floor at a McDonalds.
https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/p4345.pdf
The University of North Texas should be Harvarded.
Harvard should not only be de-exempted and defunded. It should be de-accredited. Its assets should be seized in civil forfeiture.
In its IRS Form 990, Harvard promised to provide education in exchange for its tax exemption. In education, all sides of a subject are reviewed. Instead, Harvard provides destroy America, Commie indoctrination false propaganda. Cancel this treason indoctrination camp. Seize its assets for a bad 990 Form.
You may ask, should one force that the geocentric theory the sun turns around the earth be taught in astronomy class? The answer is yes. It will enrich education to review why one cannot believe one's eyes, and the evidence for the heliocentric theory of Aristarchus from 2500 years ago. The geocentric theory was imposed with the death penalty for 1800 years by the lawyer profession. It is still being taught in Madrassas.
In other words, education is what you say it is and nothing else.
If Jackson had promoted the works of Richard Wagner and Anton Bruckner as well, the confusion in ideological lensing might have gotten him off quicker and cheaper.
Keep politics out of music?
Remember 2020, when it was widely touted that "silence is violence."
There's no time that isn't a time for stupid.
What about John Cage's 4'33"?
I could argue that that piece does violence to the concept of “music“.
I'd argue that every piece of his I've heard has done violence to music. But after just a couple, I have gone out of my way to avoid listening to any more.
If you enjoy not listening to John Cage's music, 4'33" is a good one to not listen to.
Here is a pretty good novelty song which includes a bit of 4'33" starting at about 2:10 in the video. Unfortunately, which segment of the original is being performed is not revealed. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gzodB0Sp6ZI&ab_channel=MerleHazard
I'm curious if the song's writers/producers had permission from the John Cage Trust to use a portion of the original composition as the John Cage Trust is known to have been litigious. See: https://www.billboard.com/music/music-news/musician-settles-suit-on-silent-piece-74099/
from the web's (and, therefore, the world's) greatest authority:
"Merle Hazard (born Jonathan A. Shayne) is an American satirist known for penning and performing country songs about unconventional topics, including economics, atonal music, and physics. "
"Shayne studied philosophy at Harvard College where he wrote for The Harvard Lampoon with Conan O'Brien. [...] He later received a Juris Doctor degree from Vanderbilt University."
What about keeping music out of politics?
Do you have any idea how much explicitly political music is out there?
"What about keeping music out of politics?"
Using music to express political opinions, it would seem to me, is exactly the sort of expression that the 1st Amendment is intended to protect.
Here's one that I've long liked, written by Danny O'Keefe not long after Truman's passing. This is my favorite interpretation of this song performed by nonpareil Chris Smither: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aLyHgoROE3c&ab_channel=ChrisSmither-Topic
Sometime back in the mid-90s, a guy suggested to me that these sorts of political songs may be entertaining for a while but just wouldn't stand the test of time. Funny, that.
Re: the paragraphs that follow
The backlash was swift.
Remind me again why foolish Europeans, of the "We don't need no stinking First Amendment" type, are so certain democracy can safely wield the tyrant power of censorship.
"The court allowed Schenker's First Amendment claim..."
I think you mean Jackson's claim, since he's the plaintiff.
Yeah, and in particular Schenker's been dead for 90 years.
D'oh! Fixed.
A particularly dumb aspect of Ewell’s criticism of Shenker is his claim that Shenker’s theory was “white” and “racist” because it examined hierarchical elements in music, and hierarchies are inherently white and racists; non-white thinking is inherently non-hierarchical. As others noted, hierarchical structures are part of a great deal of world music, including a great deal of African music. One can hardly study West African music in particular without them.
While Professor Ewell picked a safely obscure subject to pick on, onecould just as easily, and with equal justification, condemn a more well-known field of study, computer science as representing nothing but racist thought on grounds that “binary thinking” is inherently white and racist in its nature. One could with equal bombast, and equal superficial plausibility to those attuned to seeing such things, call on all people opposed to racism to boycott computers and condemn anyone and anything that has anything to do with them. Would doing so help black people advance in the world?
Basing ones view of the world on this sort of comically rigid ideological wishful thinking is not going to help anyone, black or white, survive, let alone prosper, in the world.
And yet it was this very comically juvenile, comically rigid ideological wishful thinking that the University of North Texas based its actions against Professor Jackson on.
> Plaintiff also suggested Professor Ewell's criticisms of Schenker might themselves have constituted anti-Semitism. In support of this contention, Plaintiff cited studies purportedly classifying Black people as more likely to hold anti-Semitic views than whites.
so, Ewell (who's Black) wrote an article criticizing Schenker (who was Jewish) of white supremacy, then Jackson wrote an article accusing Ewell of anti-Semitism on the basis that he's Black, citing a study that Blacks are more likely to be anti-Semitic (and less likely to appreciate classical music?)
another case of racists attacking racists for being racist by being racist, I guess. deplorable, but 1A protected speech nonetheless.