In a dramatic turn of events, an Ohio federal judge has dealt a blow to Ohio University’s efforts to quash a retaliation case brought forth by a tenured professor. The professor, Yusuf Kalyango, who faced termination following a student’s sexual harassment complaint, now sees his claim gaining traction in court. U.S. District Judge Algenon L. Marbley‘s decision on Monday rejected the university’s motion for summary judgment, underscoring the strength of Kalyango’s assertions that discrimination played a pivotal role in his dismissal.
Ohio University Can’t Shut Down Ex-Prof’s Retaliation Claim : Challenging the Status Quo
Ohio University and its board of trustees attempted to dismantle Kalyango’s Title VII retaliation claim, contending that internal findings and allegations against the professor warranted his termination. However, Judge Marbley rebuffed these arguments, citing discrepancies between the board’s swift action and the Faculty Senate Hearing Committee’s measured approach. The committee, after meticulous scrutiny, twice concluded that Kalyango’s dismissal was unwarranted, casting doubt on the university’s purported justifications.
Ohio University Can’t Shut Down Ex-Prof’s Retaliation Claim : A Clash of Narratives
Kalyango, a Black man of Ugandan heritage, found himself embroiled in a contentious battle, alleging systemic bias within the university’s policies. He asserted that while facing accusations less severe than those leveled against Caucasian-American educators, he bore the brunt of stringent disciplinary actions. The professor maintained that the university’s policy favored uncorroborated allegations from women against “non-Caucasian, non-native” men, painting a picture of institutional discrimination.
The Allegations Unveiled
At the heart of the controversy lies a 2017 harassment complaint lodged by a female graduate student against Kalyango. However, Kalyango contends that the allegations boiled down to a mere suggestion of room-sharing during a trip to Rwanda, devoid of any romantic overtones or physical advances—a conversation he vehemently denies ever occurred. He further alleged that the subsequent investigation into the complaint was tainted by discriminatory motives, culminating in his suspension and eventual “de-tenuring.”
A Tale of Retaliation
Kalyango’s narrative takes a sinister turn as he accuses university officials of leveraging a dismissed sexual assault complaint from 2012 against him, resurrecting it as a tool of retaliation. According to his lawsuit, the rekindled investigation, spearheaded by individuals with vested interests, aimed to discredit him in light of his prior legal actions against the university. Despite recommendations for reinstatement from the Faculty Senate Committee, Kalyango found himself ousted from his position in April 2021.
Legal Battles Unfolding
This legal saga has been a tumultuous journey, marked by incremental victories and setbacks. While the court partially granted the university’s motion in March 2023, dismissing several counts from Kalyango’s suit, the retaliation claim stands as a beacon of hope for the embattled professor. With legal representatives from both sides remaining tight-lipped, the stage is set for a riveting courtroom showdown, where the pursuit of justice collides with entrenched institutional interests.
In Pursuit of Justice
As the legal skirmish intensifies, the spotlight remains firmly fixed on Ohio University and its handling of discrimination allegations. With Christopher E. Hogan and Amy E. Kuhlman representing the university, and Gregory A. Beck, Mel L. Lute Jr., and Andrea K. Ziarko defending Kalyango, the stakes have never been higher. Will justice prevail, or will institutional power wield its influence once more? The answer lies in the corridors of justice, where the echoes of dissent reverberate against the backdrop of a relentless pursuit of truth.
