Edwards v. Cal. Univ. - 156 F.3d 488 (3d Cir. 1998)

Rule:

A public university professor does not have a U.S. Const. amend. I right to decide what will be taught in the classroom.

Facts:

Appellant professor filed an action pursuant to 42 U.S.C.S. § 1983, alleging that appellees, a university and its president, vice-president, dean, and chairperson of the educational studies department, deprived him of his rights to free speech, due process, and equal protection, by restricting his choice of classroom materials, criticizing his teaching performance, and suspending him with pay. Appellant also alleged that appellees retaliated against him for filing the action. The district court dismissed appellant's equal protection claim, and granted summary judgment in favor of appellees on the due process claim, and a jury found in favor of appellees on the remaining claims. Appellant professor challenged the decision. 

Issue:

Under the circumstances, did the district court err in ruling in favor of appellees? 

Answer:

No.

Conclusion:

On appeal, the court affirmed. The court held that the district court's instruction on the U.S. Const. amend. I claim was irrelevant, because appellant did not have a First Amendment right to decide what would be taught in the classroom, appellant's due process claim was barred because he had not been deprived of a liberty interest protected by U.S. Const. amend. XIV, and dismissal of appellant's equal protection claim was proper where appellant's counsel admitted that the complaint failed to state a claim.