California Judge Sides With UCLA on Suspension of Professor for Failing to Give Leniency to Black Students Following George Floyd Death

Should university administrators be afforded wide latitude to cater to online mobs?

That sounds like the attitude of California Superior Court Judge H. Jay Ford III.

Ford this month issued a tentative ruling that UCLA administrators acted properly when they suspended Professor Gordon Klein after he incited an online mob by reproaching a student who asked him to essentially cancel finals for black students because of George Floyd.

Ford wrote that, “UCLA had the right to determine what public response was necessary to address and mitigate the immediate [and] extraordinary public outrage toward both Klein and UCLA arising from the public disclosure of Klein’s email.”

Ford rejected claims for breach of contract and false light – a form of libel – that Klein filed in September 2021 against the University of California Regents and the administrator who suspended him.   Klein also sought damages because his side gig as a paid expert witness dried up due to the controversy.

On December 16, Steven Goldberg, the lawyer for Klein, filed a blistering objection to the ruling. Asking the judge to reconsider, he also accused him of rank bias.

“We believe that we have been subjected to a shocking and inexplicable judicial head fake,” Goldberg wrote.

Ford has scheduled a hearing on the case for January 9.

Goldberg told the California Globe that, “I am going to take my best shot at persuading the judge to reverse his tentative decision at that time.”

The fracas with Klein dated to June 2, 2020. Leslie Giovanny,  an Asian student in his accounting class, asked Klein in an email to make the final exam for black students  “no harm”—-meaning the grade would not count so the exam would be meaningless–because they were allegedly traumatized by the killing of George Floyd the previous month.

Wait.

Why is an Asian guy advocating for special privileges for black students? Because he read online that is the kind of request everybody should make to professors.

Klein’s response to Giovanny is worth quoting in full because it typifies the spirited exchange of ideas that is theoretically supposed to be the lodestar of academia.

And it is also kind of witty and sardonic. Just fun to read.

“Thanks for your suggestion in your email below that I give black students special treatment, 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 [are] probably especially devastated as well. I am thinking that a white student from there might possibly [be] 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?”

Giovanny gave the June 2 email to friends who quickly posted it online. That same day a Change.org petition was posted demanding that Klein be fired.

It garnered 20,000 signatures and chided Klein for his “extremely insensitive, dismissive and woefully racist response to his student’s request for empathy and compassion during a time of civil unrest.”

UCLA administrators were deluged with emails complaining about Klein.

According to court documents, Antonio Bernardo, who was dean of the UCLA Anderson School of Management, told people complaining that Klein’s email was “outrageous and unacceptable” and that the University was investigating the matter.

On June 3,  Bernardo told  Klein he was placing him on administrative leave until June 24 so the school could investigate “allegations” about his “behavior” that may have violated faculty rules.

The next day, Bernardo sent a school-wide email saying Klein was suspended and under investigation for “troubling” conduct.

The subsequent investigation actually cleared Klein of wrongdoing. And UCLA’s own faculty Academic Freedom Committee concluded the suspension was not justified.

Klein declined to talk to the California Globe on the record about his case.  But shortly after it was filed in 2021 he penned an  eloquent essay for the Free Press about why he sued.

“I was suspended from my job for refusing to treat my black students as lesser than non-black peers,” he wrote.

He called the student’s request for leniency for black students, “deeply patronizing and offensive to the same black students he claimed to care so much about.”

Klein also wrote that, “No employee should ever cower in fear of his employer’s power to silence legitimate points of view, and no society should tolerate government-sponsored autocrats violating constitutional mandates.”

Even though UCLA is a state school, Klein’s complaint did not charge First Amendment violations.

Instead it argued breach of contract because UCLA violated its promise of academic freedom by suspending him.

The trial was held this summer. Both sides opted to have Judge Ford hear the case instead of a jury.

In his 30-page ruling, Ford said he found “credible” Bernardo’s testimony that he needed  to place Klein on leave to protect student “safety.”

But Steven Goldberg, the lawyer for Klein, said in his objection to the ruling that Bernardo’s claim about concern for student safety was “ludicrous” because Klein returned to the classroom anyway after his brief suspension ended.

“The notion that plaintiff’s written email expressing his belief in equal treatment for all students constituted a safety risk is ludicrous and does not support a finding that Bernardo had a good faith concern for safety. Indeed, the Court failed to identify any such possible safety risk. The lack of a genuine  safety risk further is belied by the fact that the university put plaintiff back in the classroom in less than three weeks, prior to his suspension expiring.”

Ford also rejected Klein’s claim for UCLA placing him in a false light with its public pronouncement, ruling there was nothing untruthful in Bernardo saying he was placed on leave for “troubling” behavior.

But Goldberg said in his reply that the word “troubling” is “misleading” because it connotes something more serious than an errant email.

It is worth noting that the student who received the email was not even offended by it. He ended up taking other classes with Klein.

Glenn Ricketts, spokesman for the National Association of Scholars, told the California Globe that he did not think the ruling would further embolden campus administrators to cater to mob rule because they already do that anyway.

He also threw some shade at Ford.

“I’d say mob rule has been the norm for quite a while now, extending back to the student riots of the late 1960’s.  The difference now is that today, administrators ‘don’t really need any’ pushing to align themselves with present-day student activists,” Ricketts emailed.

 “As for the judge, I’d say he either doesn’t know much about the current ideologically charged state of the academy or – more likely – he’s in sympathy.  I can’t see where his decision will be upheld if the case is appealed.”