ASU professor files lawsuit over 'inclusive communities' faculty training he says is discriminatory

Attorneys for the Arizona Board of Regents, known as ABOR, want the state court of appeals to rule an Arizona State University professor has no legal right to sue for faculty training he alleges is discriminatory.

At issue is training called “inclusive communities.”

The Goldwater Institute, a conservative think tank representing ASU professor Owen Anderson, claims the university required him to take the course, which the Goldwater Institute argues pushes an ideology of guilt in violation of a state law that bars public entities from engaging in training that presents blame or judgment on the basis of race, ethnicity or sex.

Anderson’s main accusation is that ASU’s training pushes the concept that white people and straight people are inherently racist or oppressive.

A spokesperson for ASU said in a statement that Anderson’s case misrepresents training intended to reinforce the university’s commitment to inclusiveness and student success.

“The lawsuit filed by the Goldwater Institute is false and without merit. ASU trains all faculty on its charter commitment to inclusiveness and the success of students from all walks of life. The Goldwater Institute suit misleads the court and misrepresents both the content and requirements of this training to make an argument that represents a political perspective but is not based on the law,” an ASU spokesperson said in an email.

One of the highlighted sections of the training included in Anderson’s complaint is a section on unconscious bias people may have about someone based on their race, gender, ethnicity, age or other factors.

“Dynamics of power and privilege are informed by social location, or how individuals are positioned according to their sexual orientation, race, religion, gender, ability, class status and other social identities. Power and privilege reinforce one another, creating the social conditions that maintain advantages for some and disadvantages for others. They inform the development of individual and systemic conscious and unconscious biases,” one module reads.

In a newsletter he regularly publishes online, Anderson has written that he’s treated badly at ASU because of his identity.

“I have been discriminated against by colleagues for being a white male Christian conservative,” he wrote.

Anderson and the Goldwater Institute argue that ASU’s trainings are mandatory and must be completed as a condition of employment — at least that’s how Anderson interprets ASU’s communications. Also, the inclusive communities training includes a quiz with “correct” answers to questions about the materials Anderson objects to.

In a court filing, attorneys for ABOR wrote the training isn’t required because Anderson hasn’t been punished for not completing it, and noted that the examination part of the training has been taken out.

“He [Anderson] does not allege that he has taken the training in question. He does not allege that he is facing any disciplinary action or other adverse consequence for not completing the training,” attorneys for ABOR wrote.

ABOR also argued that asking professors to take the examination and pick “correct” answers about inclusive communities that they don’t agree with is not the same as forcing them to say they agree with the ideology, because it’s just a way to confirm that faculty members reviewed the materials.

Anderson points out in his complaint that ASU refers to its own training as “required” in emailed communications to him.

ABOR asked a Superior Court judge to throw out the case, arguing that the law in question doesn’t give individuals like Anderson the right to challenge the board.

The court denied that request, so now ABOR is taking the issue to the Court of Appeals and hoping for a dismissal.

“It makes little sense for the parties to litigate claims in this Court, while the Court of Appeals simultaneously considers whether the Legislature has empowered Anderson to bring those claims at all,” ABOR attorneys said in a court filing earlier this month.

However, their opponents say they’re just trying to wriggle out of a trial.

“This looks like a delay to avoid the discovery phase of litigation and deprive Professor Anderson of additional information about the inclusive communities training that he is entitled to, we intend to oppose the motion and move this case forward,” Goldwater Attorney Stacy Skankey said.