Wednesday, July 08, 2009 (21:36:42)
Source: Democracy Now! Headlines for July 8, 2009Ward Churchill Denied Bid to Return to University of Colorado
In Denver, a judge has denied former University of Colorado Professor Ward Churchill’s bid to return to his old job despite a jury’s finding he was wrongfully dismissed. Churchill sued the school after he was fired from a tenured position on charges of research misconduct. But Churchill maintains that the allegations were a pretext to remove him for his political beliefs. In April, a jury ruled in Churchill’s favor and ordered the school to pay his attorney fees. But on Tuesday, Chief Judge Larry Naves of Denver District Court said university officials are legally protected from Churchill’s bid to reverse his firing because they were acting as judicial officers. Churchill says he plans to appeal. His lawyer, David Lane said: “This is judicial activism in its worst form… a jury said Ward Churchill’s free speech was violated, and yet Judge Naves goes on for almost 50 pages, saying in so many words, ‘Too bad.’”
Source: Ward Churchill Solidarity Network
Judge Naves Tosses the Jury Verdict; Says the Regents are Immune from Suit
July 7, 2009
On April 2, 2009, after hearing evidence for a month, a Denver jury unanimously found that Ward Churchill had been fired from the University of Colorado not because of research misconduct but in retaliation for speech protected by the First Amendment.
After more than four years of political attacks on Ward Churchill, a clear statement had been made: the University of Colorado had violated the U.S. Constitution when it fired Churchill, a tenured full professor of American Indian Studies.
The normal remedy in such cases? Reinstatement.
Today, July 7, 2009, Judge Larry Naves of the Denver District Court threw out the jury’s verdict, adopting the University’s argument that the Regents have “quasi-judicial” immunity from such lawsuits. In essence, this means that the Regents and University administrators are free to continue to violating the Constitution.
In a 42-page opinion lifted wholesale from the University’s pleadings, Judge Naves went on to explain why Ward Churchill should not be given front pay, back pay, or be reinstated.
All of these are irrelevant, of course, if the jury’s verdict is not upheld. But the fact that the judge went to such pains to adopt the University’s arguments – which often directly contravened the factual record in this case – speaks volumes.
This ruling simply confirms what we have observed so often. When given access to the facts, regular people on the street can make clear, reasoned decisions that uphold constitutional values. It is rare, however, to find persons in positions of power who will not bow to political pressure.
Attorney David Lane will, of course, appeal this decision. Ward Churchill’s reaction? “I can’t think of any way to improve upon Steve Earle’s line from The Hard Way: ‘There are some who break and bend. I’m the other kind.’”
Read Russell Means' Response
Videos featuring Ward Churchill from our Media archive.
The Ward Churchill Solidarity Network
- Posted by: personman
- Topic: Ward Churchill
