UCLA Professor Files Lawsuit Over Suspension Related to Grading Policy

Categories: College University AthleticsCollege/University NewsEducation

Students at UCLA discussing academic freedom and grading policies.

News Summary

Gordon Klein, a UCLA professor, is set to initiate a $22 million lawsuit against the university and its dean after being suspended for denying lenient grading requests for Black students. The suspension, driven by backlash to an email response during heightened social activism following George Floyd’s death, has significantly impacted Klein’s reputation and career. UCLA maintains the suspension was justified, citing previous behavioral issues, while Klein contends it has harmed his expert witness prospects. The upcoming trial raises key questions about academic freedom and handling of social justice issues within universities.

Santa Monica, CA — The trial for a $22 million lawsuit filed by UCLA Professor Gordon Klein is set to begin on July 1, 2025. Klein is suing the University of California, Los Angeles, and its dean, Antonio Bernardo, following his suspension for denying a request for lenient grading criteria for Black students, which arose during the heightened social activism after the death of George Floyd in 2020.

Klein’s legal action stems from a response he provided to a student who sought adjusted grading policies based on racial grounds, claiming emotional distress linked to the Black Lives Matter protests. He faced significant backlash for his email rebutting the request, which ultimately led to a public suspension in June 2020. Klein argues that this suspension has severely impacted his reputation and career, particularly in his role as a litigation expert, where he previously earned around $1 million annually.

This lawsuit has seen several delays since Klein first filed it in September 2021. Klein maintains that since his suspension, potential clients in his expert witness business are now hesitant to work with him due to the negative perception that has emerged regarding his views. He lists damages including lost income and emotional distress, attributing these directly to his portrayal as racist following the incident.

UCLA asserts that Klein’s suspension was justified, claiming it was due to the “tone and manner” of his response rather than its content. Additionally, the university has referred to previous behavioral issues from Klein as further justification for his dismissal. Klein disputes this characterization, emphasizing his otherwise exemplary 44-year tenure at UCLA without incident.

The controversy was magnified when a petition demanding Klein’s removal from his position garnered over 21,000 signatures, reflecting a growing student sentiment against his handling of the grading request. Conversely, a counter-petition defending Klein attracted more than 75,000 signatures, illustrating a sharply divided campus community on the issue.

Following student complaints and the ensuing controversy, Dean Bernardo described Klein’s behavior in a campus memo as “troubling,” leading to an investigation. Despite the suspension, Klein was reinstated less than a month later, although he contends that the damage to his reputation was irreversible and has harmed his prospects as an expert witness in high-profile legal cases, such as Michael Jackson’s wrongful death trial and Apple’s acquisition of Beats headphones.

In his lawsuit, Klein alleges multiple grievances against UCLA, including infringement of his right to privacy, breach of contract, and retaliatory discrimination. The case has moved to the trial phase after a judge previously rejected UCLA’s attempt to dismiss it entirely. Klein has been allowed to proceed with claims surrounding breach of contract and negligence, which highlights the complexities surrounding employment rights and academic expression in the current social climate.

As the trial date approaches, the case is expected to draw significant attention, not only for its implications for Klein’s career but also for its potential impact on academic freedom and institutional responses to social justice issues. The outcome of this trial could set a precedent for how universities navigate the challenging intersection of professor conduct, student expectations, and socio-political pressures.