Law Schools
University of Arkansas rescinds job offer to law school dean, reportedly over political pressure
Emily Suski. (Photo Courtesy of University of Arkansas)
The University of Arkansas has reversed its decision to hire Emily Suski as its new law school dean for reportedly joining a group of other law professors in filing an amicus brief at the U.S. Supreme Court in support of transgender student athletes.
The University of Arkansas, which announced Suski’s new role on Jan. 9, said on Wednesday that it was moving in a “different direction” after receiving “feedback from key external stakeholders about the fit between Professor Suski and the university’s vacancy,” according to Law360.
State Rep. Nicole Clowney, a Democrat, said in an Instagram post that after the university announced it would hire Suski, “a few state legislators along with at least one constitutional officer became aware” of Suski’s involvement in the amicus brief. This “alerted Arkansas elected officials that Prof. Suski may share different political views than they do on this one issue,” she also said in the post.
The Supreme Court is currently considering challenges to West Virginia and Idaho laws that ban transgender participation in sports. Suski, along with 16 other law professors from such universities as Columbia Law School and Georgetown University Law Center, filed their amicus brief in the case in November, Law360 reports. Prior to her hiring at the University of Arkansas, Suski was a law professor and associate dean at the University of South Carolina Joseph F. Rice School of Law.
The University of Arkansas did not immediately respond to Law360’s request for comment but said when announcing the job recission that university officials “continue to hold Professor Suski in high regard” and “wish Professor Suski well as she moves forward with her career.”
Holly Dickson, executive director at the ACLU of Arkansas, weighed in on the situation, contending that the University of Arkansas decided against hiring Suski “not because she was unqualified, but because she exercised her First Amendment rights in a court of law.”
“That is not just wrong,” Dickson also said, according to Law360. “It is unconstitutional.”
Write a letter to the editor, share a story tip or update, or report an error.
