Urofsky v. Gilmore

The case of Urofsky v. Gilmore (2000) involved a statute from Virginia that forbade public employees from accessing sexually explicit material on the Internet on publicly owned or leased computers, except in conjunction with bona fide research projects.

Sweezy v. New Hampshire

At issue in Sweezy v. New Hampshire (1957) was whether a state investigation of alleged subversive activities deprived a speaker at a university of due process of law under the Fourteenth Amendment.

Slochower v. Board of Higher Education of New York City

Slochower v. Board of Higher Education of New York City (1956) stands for the legal proposition that laws pertaining to public employees, including faculty members at public colleges and universities, cannot inferentially treat employees’ assertions of Fifth Amendment privilege not to speak for fear of self-incrimination as automatically equivalent to legal wrongdoing.

Regents of the University of Michigan v. Ewing

In Regents of the University of Michigan v. Ewing (1985), the U.S. Supreme Court faced the issue of whether university officials acted arbitrarily in violation of a student’s substantive due process rights when a faculty board dismissed him from a program without granting him an opportunity to retake a medical board examination that he failed.

Perry v. Sindermann

At issue in Perry v. Sindermann (1972) was whether the Fourteenth Amendment required college officials to provide procedural due process when they choose not to renew the contract of a faculty member who lacked tenure.

National Labor Relations Board v. Yeshiva University

National Labor Relations Board v. Yeshiva University (1980) stands out as perhaps the U.S. Supreme Court’s most significant ruling on whether faculty members may organize and bargain collectively with officials representing their private colleges and universities.

Lehnert v. Ferris Faculty Association

At issue in Lehnert v. Ferris Faculty Association (1991) was whether the union representing faculty members at a college could compel dissenting members in an agency shop to subsidize legislative lobbying and other political activities not directly related to standard collective bargaining activities such as contract negotiation and grievance adjudication.

Kimel v. Florida Board of Regents

Kimel v. Florida Board of Regents (2000) is a landmark U.S. Supreme Court case dealing with congressional ability to abrogate the sovereign immunity of states from lawsuits charging violation of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA), a federal statute that protects workers over the age of 40 from discrimination.