FOLLOW US

In a riveting turn of events, Vermont Law School scored a victory in the Second Circuit on Friday, when the court decided that the school's choice to screen a provocative mural depicting Vermont's connection with the Underground Railroad didn't amount to the mural's annihilation.

This decision echoes an earlier summary judgment favoring the school against the muralist, Samuel Kerson, who sought redress under the 1990 Visual Artists Rights Act (VARA). VARA, a beacon for visual artists, grants them the power to litigate over the modification or destruction of their creations.

However, the three-judge panel adeptly clarified, "Just because an artwork is hidden behind a veil, it doesn't equate to its modification or destruction as envisaged by VARA."

Kerson's Arguments: From Destruction to Reputation Damage

In a compelling appeal, Kerson equated the permanent concealment of his mural, majestically painted onto the community center's wall at the school, to its destruction.

Drawing from VARA, which enshrines moral rights, he insisted on an artist's prerogative both to be recognized for their work and to see it retained in its original form post-sale or licensing.

But, the panel retorted that Kerson's understanding of "destruction" veered off from any traditional comprehension.

They poignantly noted that the mural's essence remained untouched, even though it lay beneath acoustic panels – a shield that never made physical contact, thereby preserving its original grandeur.

Adding another layer to his argument, Kerson suggested that this act of concealment tainted his professional reputation.

Yet, the panel, echoing both statutory and plain definitions, firmly disagreed.

The mural's safeguarding under acoustic panels, Kerson warned, might expose it to harmful environmental factors.

Still, the panel, resonating with the district court's stance, found this claim inadmissible under VARA's framework.

Vermont Law School : The Mural's Controversial Past

Named "The Underground Railroad, Vermont and the Fugitive Slave", Kerson's mural from 1993 stirred waves of controversy since 2001.

Many voiced discomfort with its representation of Black individuals.

As the document reveals, some viewers even felt it bore an uncomfortable resemblance to racist caricatures, painting enslaved individuals in a demeaning light.

Momentum to remove the artwork intensified in 2020's summer heat, culminating in a plea for its removal, endorsed by over 100 members of the school community.

 Echoes from the Courtroom and Beyond

After the school's decision to employ acoustic barriers, Kerson retaliated with a lawsuit. A Vermont district court, however, deflated his hopes for an injunction. The school's representative, Justin Barnard of Dinse PC, lauded Friday's ruling, commending the court's precise judgment.

As for Kerson's counsel? Silence – they haven't provided a statement yet.

The presiding judges for the Second Circuit were U.S. Circuit Chief Judge Debra Ann Livingston, Circuit Judge José A. Cabranes, and U.S. District Judge Rachel P. Kovner.$