López Prater v. Trs. of Hamline Univ. of Minn.

693 F.Supp.3d 1009

Erika LÓPEZ PRATER, Plaintiff, v. TRUSTEES OF the HAMLINE UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA, Defendant.

Case No. 23-cv-00505 (KMM/DJF)

United States District Court, D. Minnesota

Signed September 15, 2023

Adam A. Gillette, David H. Redden, Nicholas G.B. May, Fabian May & Anderson, PLLP, Minneapolis, MN, for Plaintiff.

Kevin R. Coan, Mark T. Berhow, Hinshaw & Culbertson LLP, Minneapolis, MN, for Defendant.

ORDER

Katherine M. Menendez, United States District Judge

This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff Erika López Prater's Motion to Remand this case to Minnesota state court [ECF No. 13.], and Defendant Trustees of the Hamline University of Minnesota's ("Hamline") Motion to Dismiss Ms. López Prater's Complaint. [ECF No. 7.] For the reasons set forth below, Ms. Lopez's motion is DENIED, and Hamline's motion is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART.

I. Background

The dispute arises out of the non-renewal of Ms. López Prater's employment contract to teach at Hamline during the Spring of 2023. Hamline hired Ms. López Prater as an Undergraduate Adjunct Instructor to teach a World Art class for the Fall 2022 semester. [Complaint ("Compl."), ECF No. 1-3, ¶ 4.] Her employment at Hamline was subject to the policies set forth in Hamline's Faculty Handbook. [Id. at ¶ 64.] Upon her acceptance of Hamline's offer of appointment on August 8, 2022, she became a Service Employees International Union Local 284 ("Union") Unit Member covered by a Collective Bargaining Agreement for Certain Undergraduate Adjunct Faculty ("CBA"). [Notice of Removal, ECF No. 1, ¶ 1.] Ms. López Prater acknowledged the requirement that she become a Unit Member of the Union in an email to her supervisor and department chair of the Art and Digital Media Department, Allison Baker, in September 2022. [Id. ¶ 4.] Later that month, Ms. Baker asked Ms. López Prater if she was interested in teaching a contemporary art class during the spring semester, and Ms. López Prater indicated that she was. [Compl. ¶ 12.] Hamline listed the class as a course offering for the spring. [Id. ¶ 13.]

Ms. López Prater is not Muslim but knew that some Muslims object to viewing art containing images of the Prophet Muhammad. [Id. ¶ 5.] In October 2022, as part of a unit on Islamic art, Ms. López Prater showed two paintings displaying the Prophet Muhammad during a class conducted remotely over Zoom. [Id. ¶¶ 14, 15.] According to the Complaint, it is undisputed that both paintings were made with great reverence for the Prophet Muhammad, and Ms. López Prater warned students before showing the paintings. [Id., ¶. 19] During class, a Muslim student, Aram Wedatalla, viewed the paintings and was offended by them. [Id. ¶ 20.] Ms. Wedatalla stayed on the video call after the other students left and expressed outrage to Ms. López Prater that images of the Prophet Muhammad were displayed. [Id.] After the conversation ended, Ms. López Prater emailed Ms. Baker to explain what happened in class and alerted Ms. Baker that Ms. Wedatalla might contact her. [Id. ¶ 22.] Ms. Baker responded via email saying, "I'm sorry that happened and it sounded like you did everything right. I believe in academic freedom, so you have my support but thank you for the heads up." [Id.]

On October 7, 2022, Ms. Baker notified Ms. López Prater that Ms. Wedatalla had complained to Marcela Kostihova, the Dean of Hamline's College of Liberal Arts. [Id. ¶ 23.] Ms. Baker told Ms. López Prater that sending Ms. Wedatalla an email apologizing for making her feel uncomfortable would be a good idea, but not to backpedal on her right to academic freedom under Hamline's policy. [Id.] Ms. López Prater drafted an email and provided it to Ms. Baker to review. [Id. ¶ 24.] After receiving Ms. Baker's suggested edits, Ms. López Prater sent an email apologizing that the images made Ms. Wedatalla uncomfortable. [Id.] Ms. Wedatalla did not respond to the email, but allegedly shared it others. [Id. ¶ 25.]

Around October 10, Ms. López Prater had two discussions with Dean Kostihova. [Compl. ¶ 26.] During the first conversation, Dean Kostihova told Ms. López Prater that it was not a good idea for her to have shown images of the Prophet Muhammad. [Id.] Dean Kostihova informed Ms. López Prater that there had been a significant outcry within the Muslim Student Association as well as by Muslim faculty and staff and that Muslim staff were threatening to resign. [Id.] Dean Kostihova recommended that Ms. López Prater apologize in class. [Id.] During their second conversation, Ms. López Prater expressed concern about the damage the situation may cause to her career. [Id. at 27.] She also explained that excluding Muslim paintings of the Prophet Muhammad would be discriminatory because it would privilege the religious views of Muslims who object to viewing depictions of the Prophet Muhammad over those of Muslims who do not object. [Id.]

During class on October 11, Ms. López Prater apologized to her students and asked if anyone would like to discuss the situation further. [Id. ¶ 28.] No one responded to her invitation, and she informed them that she was open to having a conversation later if they were uncomfortable discussing the matter during class. [Id.] Despite her apologies, around October 24, Ms. Baker notified Ms. López Prater that the class she had been scheduled to teach during the spring semester was being canceled and that her contract would not be renewed. [Id. ¶ 29.] Ms. Baker wrote:

We have deeply appreciated the breadth of knowledge you have brought to Hamline this semester but as a department we need to make a spring semester change and will no longer be able to offer the contemporary art history class online as we had previously discussed.

[Id.]

On November 7, 2022, while Ms. López Prater was still employed by Hamline, Associate Vice President of Inclusive Excellence, David Everett, Ph. D., sent the following email to all Hamline employees and students:

Several weeks ago, Hamline administration was made aware of an incident that occurred in an online class. Certain actions taken in that class were undeniably inconsiderate, disrespectful, and Islamophobic. While the intent behind those actions may not have been to cause harm, it came at the expense of Hamline's Muslim community members. While much work has been done to address the issue in question since it occurred, the act itself was unacceptable. *** I want to make it clear: isolated incidents such as we have seen define neither Hamline nor its ethos. They clearly do not meet community standards or expectations for behavior. We will utilize all means at our disposal, up to and including the conduct process, to ensure the emotional health, security and well-being of all members of our community.

[Compl. ¶ 33.]

On November 18, Hamline's student newspaper, The Oracle, published a staff editorial titled, "Incidents of hate and discrimination." [Id. ¶ 42.] The article did not name Ms. López Prater but repeated the assertion from Dr. Everett's email that what occurred in the October 6 class was "Islamophobic." [Id.] The article also stated that the incident "harmed and traumatized" individuals in the Muslim community. [Id.] Later that day, Ms. López Prater sent an email to Dean Kostihova and Ms. Baker calling out Dr. Everett's campus-wide email as defamatory. [Id. ¶ 44.]

Around this time, Dean Kostihova informed Ms. López Prater that The Oracle was interviewing people about the events from her October 6 class and intended to publish another article about it. [Compl. ¶ 40.] Dean Kostihova informed her that the article would not include her name. [Id.] However, Ms. López Prater was the only art historian on campus teaching the only art history class that semester. Ms. López Prater asked that The Oracle not run its intended article about her October 6th class. [Id. ¶ 44.] But The Oracle nonetheless published the article on December 6. [Id. ¶ 45.] Multiple Hamline officials were quoted in the article. Hamline's Dean of Students stated that Ms. López Prater's conduct was "an act of intolerance," and the Assistant Director of Social Justice Programs and Strategic Relations said that Ms. López Prater's showing of the paintings was "something that in a million years, [he] never expected . . . would happen . . . at Hamline." [Id. ¶¶ 47, 48.] Dr. Everett told The Oracle that because of the incident, it was decided that "it was best that this faculty member was no longer part of the Hamline community." [Id. ¶ 49.]

In December 2022, during an in-person "Community Conversation" held on Hamline's campus, Jaylani Hussein, Executive Director of the Minnesota chapter of the Council on American-Islamic relations ("CAIR-MN") made several allegedly defamatory statements about Ms. López Prater. [Id. at ¶ 56.] Mr. Hussein asserted that Ms. López Prater showed the images of the Prophet Muhammad for no reason other than to "provoke, offend, and hurt" Muslim students, and that doing so was "Islamophobic." [Id.] Mr. Hussein also asserted that Ms. López Prater showed the paintings because she does not value Muslims the same as other minorities. [Id.] No Hamline official interrupted Hussein's statements. [Id. at ¶ 59.] And when Mark Berkson, a Hamline professor and Chair of the Department of Religion, tried to speak up in opposition to Mr. Hussein's statements, two members of Hamline's administration, Ms. Baker and Dr. Everett, placed their hands on his shoulders and told him to stop. [Id. at ¶ 57.]

After Hamline decided not to renew Ms. López Prater's contract, it hired a different adjunct instructor to teach a spring semester course entitled "Visual Construction of Gender." [Id. ¶ 69.] According to Ms. López Prater, she was qualified to teach the "Visual Construction of Gender" course because she previously taught similar courses at other universities, but she was not asked to teach the spring course at Hamline. [Id. ¶ 70.]

Ms. López Prater initially sued Hamline in state court. She asserted several claims: (1)...