Professor suspended for reasons unknown — even to him 

On April 14, campus security officers entered the classroom of Ohio Northern University law professor Scott Gerber and escorted him to a meeting with the law school dean, who presented Gerber with a memorandum initiating his suspension from all faculty duties. The memo also demanded he immediately depart campus “to ensure his safety, the safety of others, and to protect the instructional integrity of the college of law’s program of instruction.”

Gerber doesn’t know why all this happened, and he’s tried to find out for months.

In January, Gerber received an email telling him the university had opened an independent investigation of him with the Taft law firm. In that email, Taft attorney Cary Snyder reached out to schedule an interview, but refused multiple requests from Gerber and his lawyer to provide details of the specific complaints. Snyder also noted at the time that the law firm “does not have any authority to compel Professor Gerber to submit to an interview and so his participation is completely voluntary.”

The professor and his counsel repeatedly explained to Snyder that without being given the specifics, Gerber could not adequately prepare for such an interview or defend himself against any allegations. Still empty-handed and in the dark, Gerber justifiably declined to participate.

On Feb. 10, Snyder notified Gerber and his counsel by email that Taft was concluding their investigation — despite still not divulging details and not speaking with Gerber directly. In contrast to their initial statement that Gerber’s participation was voluntary, they also indicated in this email that his lack of participation could result in career-related consequences. 

ONU’s punishment of Gerber for unspecified collegiality concerns violates its commitment to academic freedom. 

“Gerber’s refusal to participate violates Section 5.1: Standard of Conduct of the Ohio Northern University Staff Handbook,” Snyder wrote, “which lists ‘[r]efusing to cooperate with a University investigation’ and ‘insubordination’ among the behaviors that could result in disciplinary action against him.”

FIRE sent a letter to Cary Snyder on March 6, calling on ONU to “provide Gerber with the full details of the misconduct allegations” against him. However, Taft and ONU failed to change course, and on April 14, ONU removed Gerber from all of his “teaching, service, and scholarship duties,” including his “appointments as Willis Secretary, Faculty Engagement Director, and Inn of Court advisor,” and banned him from entering the ONU campus, according to the memorandum he received that day.

FIRE calls on ONU to immediately provide Gerber with the specific allegations against him — and if his suspension is based on nothing more than expression protected by ONU’s academic freedom policy, the university must reverse it.

The memorandum alleges the professor “repeatedly violated the provisions of the ONU Faculty Handbook and ONU Staff Handbook governing collegiality” and that his “conduct rises to a level sufficient to support separation” per the Faculty Handbook. 

Even this, however, does not provide Gerber with adequate information to defend himself against allegations of misconduct, or justify ONU’s sweeping investigation and punishment. ONU’s refusal to specify the terms of its investigation calls into question whether Gerber committed any infractions at all, and raises suspicion the university is punishing him for mere expression protected by ONU’s academic freedom policies.

On May 2, FIRE sent ONU President Melissa Baumann a letter insisting, once again, that “ONU must promptly provide Gerber the specific allegations against him and rescind any punishment based on his exercise of academic freedom, which the university promises to protect.” As the letter explains:

ONU’s punishment of Gerber for unspecified collegiality concerns violates its commitment to academic freedom. In its Faculty Handbook, ONU “acknowledges the importance of academic freedom,” explaining how a “faculty member is entitled to freely study, discuss, investigate, teach and publish.” This commitment to academic freedom reflects ONU’s accreditation by the Higher Learning Commission, which requires accredited institutions to be “committed to academic freedom and freedom of expression in the pursuit of truth in teaching and learning.” Ohio courts notably construe faculty handbooks as binding legal contracts to which institutions like ONU must adhere. Accordingly, any ONU faculty member would reasonably expect the institution to protect their academic freedom.

As of today, Gerber remains suspended while ONU refuses to disclose its reasons for doing so, and exactly how or why Gerber poses any danger to campus. 

ONU’s blatant disregard for fundamental fairness in the suspension and dismissal of tenured faculty, as well as its potential violation of its own academic freedom policies, indicates the state of free speech on ONU’s campus is imperiled by obscure administrative decisions made behind closed doors.

FIRE calls on ONU to immediately provide Gerber with the specific allegations against him — and if his suspension is based on nothing more than expression protected by ONU’s academic freedom policy, the university must reverse it.