Lawsuit Against University of Washington Social Work School Over Student Essay Can Proceed

The student alleged that professor Vern Harner initiated a Professional Standards Committee referral after expressing strong disagreement with the student's proposed zine project on women's rights. Court records show the interaction began on April 20, 2023, when the student mentioned her idea and showed Harner a Google search result on her computer screen.

Harner later reviewed an article the professor believed the student planned to use and described it as full of TERF and far right dog whistles and talking points. On April 27, 2023, the student presented a draft of the zine project. " The professor did not specify which social work standards the project violated.

After the meeting, Harner contacted the dean and recommended a Professional Standards Committee referral. Within 38 minutes of emailing the student that her draft was harmful and not aligned with social work values and ethics, Harner submitted the referral form.

The referral described the project as extremely anti-trans and alleged the student saw women's and trans rights as competing issues. It also raised a potential safety concern without providing supporting details. The committee met on May 16, 2023, but did not identify any specific social work standards the student had violated.

Those standards appeared for the first time in the student's termination letter, which credited Harner's account of events.

The court determined that a jury could find Harner had a personal disagreement with the student's views on transgender issues. That disagreement, according to the ruling, may have motivated the referral, tainted the review process, and led to the student's withdrawal from the program.

The decision noted that the university's actions appeared based on personal objections rather than clearly defined professional standards.

The student also claimed the university failed to follow its own policies. Program guidelines direct that individuals involved should make a concerted effort to resolve concerns before referring them to the Professional Standards Committee. University policies also promise conditions conducive to freedom of inquiry and expression.

The court found these provisions created a reasonable expectation that students would not face sanctions based on a professor's personal disagreement with their views and would have an opportunity to resolve issues first. The ruling allows both claims to be heard by a jury.

The university has not yet commented on the decision.