[DannyTN]

"I always had trouble with this decision! The “chicken” thing put him on the radar screen, but the investigation that followed uncovered the facts that led to his firing."

Me too. I think justice was done. But I'm not at ease with this decision either.

When exactly does a Board of Regents have judicial immunity? And should they have immunity? When are they deemed acting in a quasi-judicial capacity? And does a board or regency have said quasi-judicial capacity regardless of what they rule? And is there any appeal for a board of regents acting in a quai-judicial capacity?

This decision makes my stomach quasi.

[Eric in the Ozarks]

Judicial immunity is commonplace for city and county boards. Perhaps someone better versed in this could comment...

[riverdawg]

Courts are extremely reluctant to second-guess colleges and universities over faculty employment issues, like promotion and tenure. As long as established procedures were followed and due process observed, Churchill had little hope for a successful court challenge to CU’s decision. There was a similar case last year involving a Holocaust denier on the faculty somewhere. The university denied him tenure not because of his odious views (which were protected speech) but because his scholarship demonstrably sucked.