Professor Fired but Lawsuit Dismissed After Blow-up over Woke Teaching at Michigan State
Amy Wisner taught in the business school at Michigan State University (MSU) in 2022-23. According to the complaint in the case against her brought by two of her students that year, she required students to buy a $99 subscription to an online global learning platform that she operated called “The Rebellion Community.” It seems an odd pairing for a course on Business Communications. Although Professor Wisner and the website both claimed that she did not profit from the registration fees for the website, the students, self-described Christians, claim that the fees went to political causes that they opposed.
For example, an an Exhibit to the Complaint, plaintiffs attached what seems to be a screen shot from “The Rebellion Community” which claims that it it is a “safe place to coordinate our efforts to burn everything to the fucking ground.” It also proclaims that 100% of fees are donated to Planned Parenthood. Jeepers.
The students complained to the business school’s interim dean, who suspended Professor Wisner and refunded the $99 fee to the students. Seems like that should be the end of it. If you buy that, you do not understand how politics work in the 2020s.
In February 2023, plaintiffs filed a federal lawsuit against Professor Wisner and various MSU administrators in their official capacities. They alleged constitutional violations and that they were subjected to unconstitutional conditions under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. They sought a preliminary injunction — I’m not sure what was left to enjoin — which was denied in August, 2023. Both Professor Wisner and the MSU defendants filed motions to dismiss.
In July, in Barbieri v. Jeitschko, the District Court for the Western District of Michigan ruled on both motions to dismiss. It first explained that plaintiffs were not entitled to declaratory or injunctive relief because they had alleged no continuing injury nor any plausible possibility that courses like Professor Wisner’s would be offered in the future. MSU refunded plaintiffs’ money; MSU severed its connection with Professor Wisner. Because plaintiffs’ face no danger of future harm, there is nothing to declare. Take the W.
Moreover, Eleventh Amendment sovereign immunity protects the MSU defendants, acting in their official capacities, against claims other than those for injunctive relief. However, as plaintiffs have no presented no plausible theory that they are in danger of suffering any future harms at the hands of MSU or its administrators, they have no claims that can survive in the face of MSU’s sovereign immunity.
Plaintiffs have standing only to bring claims against Professor Wisner for compelled speech. The Court summarizes the holdings of relevant precedents as requiring plaintiffs to allege facts that show:
(1) that Wisner punished or threatened to punish Plaintiffs for failing to subscribe to The Rebellion Community; and (2) that subscribing to The Rebellion Community forced Plaintiffs to declare a belief or utter what is not in their minds, or subscribing to The Rebellion Community had no legitimate pedagogical concerns, or the concerns were a mere pretext.
Plaintiffs failed to allege that they were punished or threatened with punishment for failing to subscribe to The Rebellion Community. They also fail to allege that Professor Wisner attempted to compel plaintiffs to adopt a particular belief or attitude of mind. The Court also faults plaintiffs for failing to allege that The Rebellion Community served no legitimate pedagogical purpose. It may well have been duplicative of MSU’s free Desire to Learn communications platform, but that is not enough to render The Rebellion Community illegitimate. For similar reasons, the Court was not persuaded that students were compelled to associate with a group with which they disagreed. Professor Wisner required that students use the platform; they did not have to associate. Because the Court found no First Amendment violation, it found that no unconstitutional condition had been alleged.
For all of these reasons, the Court granted MSU motion to dismiss and Professor Wisner’s motion to dismiss. I wonder if MSU was okay just forking over all those refunds to students. Professor Wisner had 600 students each semester, and so the refunds may have cost MSU $60,000. As the payments likely went directly to The Rebellion Community and not to MSU, that’s a large expense. I wonder if there was a settlement or if MSU tried to recover from Professor Wisner the fees transferred to “The Rebellion Community” and through the Rebellion Community to Planned Parenthood. I would be curious to learn whether it was really true that the money was used exclusively to benefit Planned Parenthood or to burn everything to the fucking ground.