By Matthew Russell Lee, Patreon Maxwell Book
BBC - Honduras - CIA Trial Book - NY Mag
SDNY COURTHOUSE, Sept 12 – Bard College has been sued for racial discrimination, in a semi-sealed complaint which says its "nearly all-white Annandale campus [i]s a scenario from the racial horror film, 'Get out.'" Complaint on Patreon here.
Jane Doe the plaintiff is described as a gay woman of color hired by Bard in 2008. which then refused to protect her against a violent student, "conducting a sham investigation against her that was itself an act of racial harassment, and ultimately terminating her employment."
On August 29 in the case, assigned to U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York Judge Cathy Seibel, a motion for Jane Doe to proceed under a pseudonym.
On September 2, the parties agreed on a briefing schedule: Bard to oppose by September 27, reply on October 11. But Bard's letter is still not in the docket - they must agree, or filing dueling redactions by September 7. Watch this site.
The complaint quotes Bard Dean Michele Dominy telling Doe that faculty "thought she was qualified but 'arrogant.'" It says Associate Dean of Student Timand Bates, an alum, "sexually harassed and bought drugs from students."
Doe quotes Chinua Achebe he left Bard because he could not stay at a place that treated his wife that way - calling her "crazy" and "off her rocker." My old school, indeed.
On September 12 Judge Seibel ordered that the entire letter of August 30 be docketed: "ORDER re: [18] Memo Endorsement: The parties have agreed that Defendants 8/30/22 letter (to which ECF No. 14 responds) should be docketed, except Plaintiff wants one sentence redacted and Defendant objects. I find no grounds to redact the disputed sentence. It summarizes Defendants defense in this case that it had non-discriminatory reasons for its employment actions regarding Plaintiff. It or similar arguments will no doubt be repeated throughout the litigation. Whether or not it is true is essentially what the case will be about. There is no point in hiding it. To the extent Plaintiff is concerned that the sentence will be misconstrued as suggesting sexual impropriety, I can only say that any such inference is unsupported by the language used. (HEREBY ORDERED by Judge Cathy Seibel) (Text Only Order)." Watch this site.
The case is Doe v. Bard College, 22-cv-7258 (Seibel)
***
Your support means a lot. As little as $5 a month helps keep us going and grants you access to exclusive bonus material on our Patreon page. Click here to become a patron.
