The definitions in our glossary are primarily sourced from Nolo’s Plain-English Law Dictionary and Cornell Law School’s Legal Information Institute. We have made slight modifications where needed for brevity and to better tailor the definitions to the specific needs of users of this website. For more detailed explanations of the terms, users are encouraged to review the definitions on these websites or conduct their own independent research.
CASE NAME
Haltigan v. Drake, et al
Overview
Plaintiff, a psychology professor, is challenging the university of California’s requirement that prospective faculty write a DEI Statement, arguing that the requirement forces Plaintiff to express ideas with which he disagrees to be eligible for employment and constitutes viewpoint discrimination.
Details
On November 15, 2024, the district court dismissed the case for lack of standing. It ruled that Plaintiff never applied for the relevant job or any other position at the university and did not show that applying would have been futile. Without this, Plaintiff could not show harm from the DEI-related requirement, which was necessary to establish standing to sue.
Plaintiff now asks the Court of Appeals to overturn that decision and allow the case to proceed.
Court
Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals
Status
Filed January 10, 2025 | Ongoing
Litigation History
Significance
This case is one of many free-speech challenges to DEI.