Scientist sues UC Santa Cruz over diversity statement requirement

SANTA CRUZ — Former professor at the University of Toronto J.D. Haltigan filed a lawsuit Wednesday against UC Santa Cruz officials over the school’s requirement for jobseekers to include a diversity, equity and inclusion statement, commonly called a DEI statement, in their employment application, claiming it violates the First Amendment.

Haltigan, who earned his doctorate in developmental psychology at the University of Miami, is currently an independent scientist and Pennsylvania resident and is being represented by Sacramento-based attorney Wilson Freeman with the Pacific Legal Foundation.

“We’ve been keyed into the issue of DEI statements for a couple of years,” said Freeman. “We think it’s an important issue propagating, what we see as, a sort of orthodoxy throughout the academy. We think it’s a threat to the First Amendment and academic freedom. We think it’s especially bad at the University of California.”

Diversity, equity and inclusion statements have been included in the employment application process in the University of California system since 2005, and are intended to, “give examples of a candidate’s past contributions to diversity, demonstrate an understanding of the particular diversity and equity related issues and needs in a candidate’s field, or in higher education more generally, and/or discuss the candidate’s vision for how they might make contributions to diversity in the future,” according to the UCSC’s diversity statement guidelines. After a jobseeker submits their statement, university staff score it using a rubric that follows the established guidelines.

While searching for jobs earlier this year, Haltigan came upon an opening he felt he was qualified for at UCSC. After reviewing the university’s requirement to include a diversity, equity and inclusion statement with the job application, Haltigan wrote about it on an online blog with the viewpoint that DEI statement requirements for academic job applicants have, “contributed to creating a corrosive and hostile environment that is intolerant of viewpoint diversity and is anathema to high-quality research and teaching.”

Attorneys with the Pacific Legal Foundation, which has offices in California, Florida and Virginia, took notice of Haltigan’s blog post, published in late February, reached out to him, and the two parties began communicating.

“The trouble was finding somebody willing to stand up for what is right in this case,” said Freeman. “My experience with academia is that there is a sort of culture of fear. People are afraid of what is going to happen if you stand up and bring a lawsuit like this.”

Wilson and his colleague at the Pacific Legal Foundation, Jack Brown, now represent Haltigan as a plaintiff in the novel lawsuit filed Wednesday against University of California President Michael Drake, UCSC Chancellor Cynthia Larive, UCSC Psychology Department Chair Benjamin Storm and UCSC Social Sciences Dean Katharyne Mitchell.

The lawsuit compares the university’s diversity, equity and inclusion statement requirement to anti-communist loyalty oaths during the Cold War, where state employees were asked to swear that they did not belong to the Communist Party.

“The University of California is imposing a DEI statement requirement, which coupled with a series of rubrics, guidelines and dictates about what has to go in the DEI statements and what individuals who apply should say and believe, it creates what is essentially no different from a loyalty oath.” said Freeman “Individuals who want to apply have to say certain things and are told what not to say as well. That’s essentially what we are challenging.”

The lawsuit states that Haltigan is “committed to colorblindness and viewpoint diversity. He objects to DEI orthodoxy and believes individuals should be considered based on individual merit.” and also that, “If Dr. Haltigan were to apply for this position, he would be compelled to alter his behavior and either remain silent about the many important social issues addressed by the DEI statement requirement or recant his views to conform to the dictates of the university administration.”