$725K Settlement in University of North Texas Academic Freedom Case

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 Schenker’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:

1. 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.
2. 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.
3. 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.”
4. “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.
5. 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).

The post $725K Settlement in University of North Texas Academic Freedom Case appeared first on Reason.com.