The law school’s dean has made it clear that he wants to see anti-White prejudice disappear from campus.
Having experienced discrimination and harassment as a white law student at Howard University, a former student has filed a lawsuit against the university.
Michael Newman, a man who has been accused of misconduct, has been accepted to the law school at Howard University for the 2020-201 academic year. They’ve chosen to let him go in September of 2022, after only two years on the job. The plaintiff is requesting $2,000,000 in damages for his “pain, suffering, mental strain, and impairment to his character”.
According to Frank Tramble, vice president, and chief communications officer at Howard University, the university will vigorously defend itself in the lawsuit since the accusations paint a one-sided and self-serving image of the circumstances leading up to the student’s termination of enrollment. When the case was being litigated, Tramble did not offer any “substantive” comments.
According to Newman’s claim, he suffered “depression, anxiety, and suicidal ideation” after being “ostracized, vilified, and humiliated” in public. Newman suspected foul play on the part of Global Director of Multicultural Recruitment Reggie McGahee because McGahee singled him out as “the school’s most disliked student.”
When Newman protested to the dean of Howard Law School about his treatment, the dean denied vehemently that any White students had ever been the victim of racial discrimination.
Supposedly, he posted a photo of a scarred slave with the statement, “But we don’t know what he did before the shot was taken.”
According to Newman, this tweet is directed at those who “attempt to explain away evidence indicating police aggression by arguing the victim must have committed a crime before the video started.” His claims included age and appearance slurs, as well as sexually explicit language.
Despite the school’s strategy of actively encouraging kids to engage in distant learning, students at Newman Middle School used online forums and tools like GroupMe to remain in touch with one another.
“whether: (1) Black people didn’t question looking to government for answers and (2) constantly voting for the same party every election disincentivized both parties from responding to the difficulties facing the black neighborhoods,” Newman questioned on a professor’s forum website. Anything here has some bearing on the upcoming 2020 election.
Many complaints from Newman’s previous pupils led to his dismissal from his teaching post.
As a Black student at a mostly White institution, Newman described himself as “utterly alone.” He realized his statements had offended several young people.
In court, defendant Newman expressed regret for any emotional distress he may have caused and vowed to “learn, not only the law but to accept the opinions and experiences of individuals of color.”
Students’ hostility for Newman grew when he was nicknamed the “mayo king” and the “white panther.” Reports from student surveys indicate that pupils were “greatly worried” and “distracted from studying” because of Newman’s claimed involvement in many “controversies.”
In a four-part letter, the student argues that Newman “manipulated [classmates’] emotions… as a sociological experiment.” It is claimed that once Newman received the letters, he was barred from participating in relevant online forum conversations.
Holley urged Newman to switch schools and falsely accused him of using racial slurs during a private Zoom session between Newman, McGahee, and Holley.
At a virtual town hall with 300 participants, Holley allegedly called Newman’s comments “disturbing in every definition of the term.” Supposedly, she cut off his connection, rendering it difficult for him to carry on the chat in real-time.
Holley claims that Newman harassed and disrupted “members of the Howard Law community” and the “studying atmosphere of the School of Law.” The debate reportedly grew more heated as Holley continued to use the phrases “threat” and “discrimination,” as reported by Newman.
They looked into Holley’s claim and found Newman to be “responsible,” so they kicked him out. Despite Newman’s repeated warnings, nothing was done to fix the issue.
The second review panel reached the same conclusion as the first, despite Newman’s knowledge that Holley had presented “secret evidence” to the first review panel that Newman had not seen.
Newman’s legal team has filed this complaint in federal court.
The attorneys for Newman claim that their client was unlawfully dismissed from the institution while receiving a scholarship due to the university’s excessive use of review panels and hearings.