Now that the University of Colorado Board of Regents has voted to fire Professor Churchill--a sanction recommended by only one of the five members of the Committee that prepared the report on Professor Churchill's research misconduct--some readers may be interested in my earlier remarks on the subject. A number of law professors have played important roles in this process, including Colorado's Marianne Wesson, who chaired the investigative Committee; her colleague Paul Campos, who, disgracefully, called early on for Professor Churchill to be fired for his offensive speech; and Robert Clinton, a distinguished Federal Indian Law Scholar at Arizona State, who also served on the Committee. Those who have actually read the report (they are clearly few and far between, judging from the commentary) will realize that the punishment is so clearly disproporionate to the actual scholarly offenses that Professor Churchill's prospects in court--where he will argue that his offensive speech is the real reason the university is punishing him, in violation of the First Amendment--are likely to be good.
UPDATE: A reader calls my attention to a statement on the case by another leading Indian law scholar, Robert A. Williams of the University of Arizona.
ONE MORE: Here is a copy of the amended complaint filed today in state court in Denver against the University by Churchill. I have not had an opportunity to read it, so can not illuminate its contents.