Table of Contents
University of Hawaiâi dean sues law professor who criticized diversity event

Osugi / Shutterstock.com
When the University of Hawaiâi at Manoa planned a Black History Month event in February 2023 that lacked any black facilitators, law professor Kenneth Lawson publicly challenged a dean about it at a faculty meeting. Nearly two years later, and shortly after clashing with administrators over their decision to doctor one of his class presentations, Lawson suddenly must defend himself against a defamation lawsuit over his remarks â one filed by that same dean.
On Feb. 20, Lawsonâs legal team filed an anti-SLAPP motion to dismiss the deanâs lawsuit, in which she alleged that Lawsonâs heated arguments with her concerning the Black History Month event, as well as Lawsonâs call to boycott the event, were defamatory. Lawsonâs legal team argues that the defamation suit is âan attempt to chill and silence Professor Lawsonâs constitutionally protected speech.â And the fact that it came fast on the heels of a curriculum dispute raises further questions of retaliation.
2023: Lawson files First Amendment lawsuit against university following imbroglio over Black History Month event
The threats to Lawsonâs expressive freedoms date to a faculty meeting back in February 2023, where he voiced vehement objections to a scheduled Black History Month event that was to feature a panel with no black facilitators. (Lawson is black.)
At the meeting, UH Dean Camille Nelson clashed with Lawson over the issue. Lawson claimed Nelson (who is also black) didnât have sufficient experience in or understanding of the Civil Rights Movement. Nelson retorted that her experience as a black woman gave her perspective to understand racism, but that she did not want to litigate that issue during the meeting. In a follow-up email, Lawson accused Nelson of being âhighly dismissiveâ of his objections, and a few days later, he called for a boycott of the panel via a university listserv.

Law professor challenges university after campus âshootingâ hypothetical changed in lesson plan
News
The University of Hawaiâi violated academic freedom and set a dangerous precedent with unilateral revisions to a law professorâs presentation on a legal concept.
UH banned Lawson from campus and launched an investigation to determine whether he had created a âhostile work environmentâ for his colleagues. The university also issued no-contact orders barring Lawson from contacting certain administrators and restricting his use of university listservs.
Lawson, in turn, sued UH for violating his First Amendment rights to speak on a matter of public concern: racism and inclusion at the university.
The university eventually sanctioned Lawson for the February 2023 incident, requiring him to complete mandatory training and serve a one-month suspension without pay. Lawson returned to teaching in August of 2024, after completing the universityâs sanctions under protest as his legal case proceeded.
2025: Lawson becomes locked in conflict over academic freedom violations
Last month, we told readers about Lawsonâs clash with the university over an in-class PowerPoint presentation. Last September, Lawson used a hypothetical involving himself and two deans â one of whom shoots at the other, misses, and hits Lawson accidentally â to teach his law students the legal concept of . The accompanying slide included website portraits of himself and the two deans to illustrate the example.

When an anonymous student filed a complaint about the example, the universityâs response to the complaint presented a master class in how to violate academic freedom. The university ordered Lawson to change the hypothetical because it could be âdisturbing and harmful,â despite the fact that he had not violated any policy. When Lawson rightfully demurred, the university unilaterally changed Lawsonâs slides, removing images of the two deansâbut leaving Lawson as the victim of the shooting. (Why students would be less disturbed by a hypothetical that still depicted their professor as a shooting victim was not explained.)

FIRE sent two letters to the university urging it to restore the hypothetical to its original state. We argued that unilaterally changing a faculty memberâs teaching materials raised serious concerns about the universityâs fealty to the basic tenets of academic freedom. Those tenets protect the right of faculty members to determine how best to teach their subjects. This freedom is even more important when those topics are complicated, difficult, or potentially upsetting to students. Going over Lawsonâs head to change the hypothetical without his consent also raises serious concerns for future academic freedom issues. Would UH consistently bypass faculty rights to change instruction until the teaching satisfied administrators?
UH dean files defamation lawsuit
Shortly after Lawson filed his censorship grievance, and nearly two years after the caseâs original filing, Nelson hit Lawson with a lawsuit of her own: She alleged that Lawsonâs behavior at the meeting nearly two years earlier, and his subsequent email to the university listserv, had defamed her.
She suffered significant emotional distress and reputational harm, she says, because of Lawsonâs alleged accusations of her of being a silent âIntellectual Negro.â&˛Ô˛ú˛őąč;
Yet defamation claims require proof that the targeted person made false statements of fact, not just heated statements of opinion. There is no way to read Lawsonâs remarks as anything but opinion. Furthermore, the First Amendment offers a âwide latitudeâ for faculty members to express themselves âon political issues in vigorous, argumentative, unmeasured, and even distinctly unpleasant terms.â&˛Ô˛ú˛őąč;

Baseless SLAPP suits threaten the speech rights of all Americans
News
FIREPresident Greg Lukianoff explains why we are defending Iowa pollster J. Ann Selzer against Donald Trump.
SLAPP lawsuits â strategic lawsuits against public participation â are often used to silence expression by bringing legal claims about othersâ speech. Lawsonâs legal team filed his anti-SLAPP motion seeking the deanâs suitâs dismissal on Feb. 20.
We hope this motion will give UH the sharp reminder it needs that faculty members have a right to speak on matters of public concern. Faculty members also have the right to determine how to approach their courses. And faculty members shouldnât have to fear retaliation â in the university setting or in the court of law â for exercising their First Amendment rights.
Weâll continue to keep readers apprised of Lawsonâs battle against his university.
Recent Articles
FIREâs award-winning Newsdesk covers the free speech news you need to stay informed.

Maineâs censure of lawmaker for post about trans student-athlete is an attack on free speech

Trumpâs border czar is wrong about AOC

FIREcalls out 60 Minutes investigation as 'political stunt' in comment to FCC
