No "Academic Deference" Given to University's Denial of Tenure Application When Charge of Racial Discrimination Made

Mawakana v. Board of Trustees of the University of the District of Columbia - D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals

Facts:  Kemit Mawakana ("Mawakana"), a black male, worked at the University of the District of Columbia ("University") as a law professor.  Mawakana was on a three year contract and in 2009 it was renewed.  In 2010, he was promoted to Associate Professor and he subsequently applied for tenure.  In 2012, he attended a meeting of the faculty subcommittee that was assigned to review his application for tenure as was told the application "was in good shape."  However, the subcommittee apparently told Mawakana soon after that it has concerns about his scholarship.  The dean of the law school and the chair of the subcommittee asked Mawakana to withdraw his application which he refused to do.  The subcommittee then denied Mawakana's request for tenure.  The University Provost adopted the recommendation of the subcommittee with the University President upholding the Provost's recommendation.  Mawakana subsequently received notice his tenure application had been denied and he would be terminated in August 2013.

Mawakana proceeded to file suit against the University under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the D.C. Human Rights Act ("DCHRA") on the grounds that he had been discriminated against because of his race, in regard to the University's denial of his tenure.  The University moved for summary judgment, which the district court granted on the grounds that the University had "academic deference" in regard to making tenure decisions.  Mawakana proceeded to appeal.

Holding:  (Note, this case brief only looks at the "academic deference" portion of the Court's opinion.)  The D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals recognized that while academic institutions had been granted an exemption by Congress in regard to Title VII, that exemption had long since been rescinded.  While some courts had found that deference to academia was appropriate in certain circumstances, the United States Supreme Court has all but clarified that the normal Title VII standard applies to universities.  Following this reasoning, the Court held that a concept of academic freedom does not entitle a university to special deference in a Title VII tenure case such as this.  It is important to note here that the Court recognized that the University's decision to deny tenure cannot be second guessed if the decision to deny tenure was made in good faith.  However, if Mawakana could establish that the University's decision to deny tenure was made as a result of Mawakana's race, no "academic deference" could be given to the University's decision.

Judgment:  The D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals reversed the district court's ruling and reinstated the case on the grounds that Mawakana could proceed on his Title VII and DCHRA claims on the grounds that the University did not have "academic deference" to discriminate against Mawakana's tenure application because of his race, as alleged in Mawakana's petition.

The Takeaway:  This was quite the novel argument for the University to make here, wasn't it?  I understand, generally speaking, the University's belief that it should be provided some latitude (or "academic deference") to make decisions over whether to approve or deny a tenure application.  With that being said, as the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals clarified, while a university has some ability to approve or deny a tenure application, that decision cannot be rooted in an unlawful nature...such as racial discrimination.

Majority Opinion Judge:  Judge Henderson

Date:  June 14, 2019

Opinion:  https://www.cadc.uscourts.gov/internet/opinions.nsf/5F54313E6207C36E8525841900509AC1/$file/18-7059.pdf