The Obama years were filled with cases where college officials, under intense federal pressure, dealt harshly with male students and faculty members who’d been accused of impropriety by a female. The crucial thing was to use blatantly one-sided procedures that gave the accused little chance at defending himself. Many judges found those procedures to be appalling violations of due process.
As a professor at the University of North Carolina has learned, those days never went away. Professor Christopher Wretman was terminated last year based on flimsy accusations by three women. I write about the case in today’s Martin Center article.
Wretman, who had earned his degrees at UNC, taught in the School of Social Work. Several projects involved working with younger women. One complained that his style made her uncomfortable; another said she detected “anti-Asian hate” in him; another (who didn’t even work for UNC at the time), was irked by an email that UNC officials said was “retaliation” against her. Eventually, they settled on “retaliation” as the charge they’d pursue.
At almost every step, UNC violated its own policies. Wretman was not given the investigative report. He was not allowed to present any counterevidence. He was not allowed to cross-examine the witnesses. His complaints about those violations were ignored. Once the officials had made up their minds, they notified him of his termination. Wretman’s appeals were also brushed aside, although one member of the three-person Board of Trustees panel dissented, pointing out that the university had not followed its own policies.
So UNC and its overeager officials now face a lawsuit. Wretman seeks compensatory and punitive damages which could amount to a large sum. The university’s procedural abuses may soon bring a comeuppance.