Submit your comments on this article | |||
Home Front: Culture Wars | |||
One Step Closer to Firing Ward Churchill | |||
2006-11-03 | |||
The University of Colorado can go ahead with dismissal proceedings against professor Ward Churchill and doesn't have to pay his legal fees as he fights termination, a Denver judge ruled Wednesday. Churchill's attorney David Lane wanted Denver District Judge Stephen Phillips to stop the dismissal process until the court decides whether CU had to pay Churchill up to $20,000 in legal costs. Lane claimed the rules of the CU faculty committee hearing Churchill's appeal say the university "shall contribute" up to $20,000 for attorney's fees when a faculty member is recommended for termination. But Patrick O'Rourke, CU's attorney, said the university regents never adopted that policy.
Lane said it is critical that Churchill have legal representation before CU's privilege and tenure committee as he fights for his job and reputation. Lane said the committee has scheduled five days of closed hearings on Churchill beginning Monday.
The judge said Churchill can seek reimbursement later for legal fees and lost wages. "They (CU) may well owe (Churchill) the money," Phillips said. "I'm not saying the claim is not valid." In June, Phil DiStefano, who was then CU-Boulder's interim chancellor, recommended that the university fire Churchill, who was found by a faculty committee to have plagiarized and fabricated his research. Lane said that after the tenure committee hearing, he will file a lawsuit, probably in federal district court, against CU, alleging violation of free-speech rights.
Meanwhile, CU regents discussed a proposal Wednesday to tighten the time limit for tenured professors who are appealing their termination. Lawmakers have complained throughout the Churchill case that the firing of tenured professors takes too long. After administrators recommend a professor be fired, the appeal to a faculty committee has in some cases dragged on for more than a year. The new rules, which regents could vote on in December, would set a six-month time limit for the appeal process. | |||
Posted by:lotp |
#6 Professor Churchill doesn't have $20,000. God damn, do I love that sentence... |
Posted by: Raj 2006-11-03 18:10 |
#5 Nice, if surprising, to see this proceeding. Sounds like maybe UC has noticed a dropoff in alumni donations? |
Posted by: Glenmore 2006-11-03 17:50 |
#4 I wouldn't mind so much if he wasn't publicly funded, doing indoctrination on teh public's dime. If he wants to be a lying, stealing, asshole in his own time, on a private salary earned by whatever nonapparent skills he may have, fine. Everyone's entitled to be a pompous jerk (see: DNC, MoveOn.org, Kos...), just don't ask us to pay for it |
Posted by: Frank G 2006-11-03 15:55 |
#3 It's a Good Thing if being a lying piece of shit and total asshole has consequences. I just think this should've been solved long ago - with a nod toward something more painful for him - and more "instructive" for those of similar ilk. I think that this case is perfectly emblematic of just how deeply PCized our society has become. I anticipate rather traumatic times ahead. |
Posted by: .com 2006-11-03 15:36 |
#2 Good. Now on to more critical matters. What's up with the football Buffs? |
Posted by: badanov 2006-11-03 15:27 |
#1 Ward needs to be very careful with what he says and what he does. There are a couple of Sioux that are really angry with him, and half the Ute Indian reservation would gladly contribute to his one-way busride to Yellowknife, NWT. He is not a popular man in Colorado (except around the People's Republic of Boulder, and not too popular there any more). |
Posted by: Old Patriot 2006-11-03 14:54 |