Cases where a college tried to fire or demote a tenured professor

Yes. Reported cases show that colleges and law schools have occasionally sought to terminate or demote tenured professors, often raising constitutional and procedural issues involving due process and academic freedom. Outcomes depend on whether the institution followed proper procedures and whether the professor’s conduct justified dismissal.

1. Mitchell v. University of North Carolina Board of Governors (2025)

In Mitchell v. Univ. of N.C. Bd. of Governors, 121A23 (N.C. 2025), a tenured professor at Winston-Salem State University was terminated for neglect of duty, failure to perform essential teaching duties, and for sending a racially offensive letter to a colleague.[1] The professor argued that the university failed to comply with internal procedures and that the dismissal violated academic freedom. The North Carolina Supreme Court upheld the termination, finding that the university complied with its procedures and that courts generally defer to university administrative interpretations unless “plainly erroneous.” The case illustrates that even tenured professors may be dismissed for cause when misconduct or neglect undermines institutional duties and due process is observed.

2. Pickering v. Board of Education (1968)

In Pickering v. Board of Ed., 391 U.S. 563 (1968), a high school teacher was fired for writing a letter critical of the school board’s allocation of funds. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled the dismissal unconstitutional, holding that teachers do not forfeit their First Amendment rights when commenting on matters of public concern. The Court established the “Pickering balancing test,” weighing a teacher’s right to speak against the employer’s interest in maintaining efficient public service.[2] This framework has since guided courts in evaluating speech-related dismissals of tenured faculty.

3. Board of Regents v. Roth (1972) and Perry v. Sindermann (1972)

In Bd. of Regents v. Roth, 408 U.S. 564 (1972), the Court held that nontenured faculty lack a property interest in reemployment without explicit contractual or statutory entitlement. By contrast, in Perry v. Sindermann, 408 U.S. 593 (1972), the Court recognized that an implied promise of continued employment or established institutional customs could create a property interest warranting due process protections before termination.[3][4] These cases underscore that tenure or equivalent assurances confer constitutional due process rights that institutions must honor before firing or demoting professors.

Legal Standards Applied

• Due Process: Tenured faculty possess a property interest in continued employment. Before dismissal, they are entitled to written charges, notice, and a fair hearing, as articulated in Perry and Roth.
• For Cause Requirement: Termination must rest on grounds such as moral turpitude, incompetence, or serious misconduct, supported by substantial evidence.
• First Amendment and Academic Freedom: Under Pickering, Connick v. Myers, 461 U.S. 138 (1983), and related cases, courts protect faculty speech involving matters of public concern unless the speech significantly disrupts institutional functions.

Summary:
Colleges can lawfully fire or demote a tenured professor only for cause and after full procedural due process. Misconduct or failure to perform duties, as in Mitchell, may justify dismissal. However, retaliation for protected speech or failure to follow procedural requirements can render termination unlawful, as shown by Pickering and Perry.