A former University of Michigan diversity, equity and inclusion officer who accused the university of discrimination failed to prove that UM fired her based on race rather than her alleged antisemitic remarks, a federal court ruled.
However, the ruling leaves the door open for Rachel Dawson to seek other claims, including free-speech violations, in state court.
“The facts alleged by Dawson suggest that the University deviated from its standard procedure for investigating employees accused of discrimination and ultimately, and perhaps unfairly, disciplined her more harshly than other personnel accused of making equally bigoted or otherwise offensive remarks,” wrote Judge Shalina D. Kumar, an appointee of former President Joe Biden, in dismissing the federal case.
“But they do not give rise to the inference that the University singled Dawson out based on her race,gender, or membership in any protected class,” Kumar added.
Dawson, who is Black, filed suit against the UM Board of Regents in July 2025, alleging that her employment was terminated after two women exaggerated and fabricated comments she had made, painting her as an antisemite. She alleged that other, non-Black employees had made more egregious comments in the past and kept their jobs.
Specifically, she alleged the university had received complaints about several non-Black employees who went unpunished after making disparaging comments about Arab and Muslim students and insensitive remarks following the death of Charlie Kirk.
The university has maintained that Dawson’s termination had nothing to do with her race and came only after an investigation determined that she made antisemitic comments during a conversation with two other women at March 2024 conference.
Kumar wrote that Dawson’s allegations did not illustrate that race was a motivating factor in the regents’ decision to fire her. In fact, they reinforced UM’s assertions.
“The facts alleged by Dawson strongly suggest that the University’s actions against Dawson were motivated specifically by the fact that she was accused of making antisemitic remarks,” the judge wrote.
Dawson had also alleged that “discrimination and bias” may have influenced the university’s decision to discipline and later fire her.
The court rejected that claim as well, finding she did not show a link between her discrimination complaints and her termination. The judge said the university’s move toward termination was already underway before Dawson raised allegations of racial and gender bias, meaning her complaint could not have caused the disciplinary action.
University representatives did not immediately return messages seeking comment.
UM officials have said Dawson was fired amid concerns about rising antisemitism on campus and throughout the UM community.
In recent years, UM has faced controversies involving allegations of antisemitism, including complaints about campus demonstrations following the Israel-Hamas war, criticism over university responses to antisemitic incidents, and disputes over pro-Palestinian protests and campus speech.
Dawson, the former director of UM’s Office of Academic Multicultural Initiatives, also filed suit against the regents in the Michigan Court of Claims, alleging her constitutional right to free speech was violated.
“At the end of the day, she was fired for sharing her opinion about the situation in Palestine/Israel, including that she believes both groups of people deserve better leadership and equal rights, and her comments about the University’s attempts to address multiple types of bias on campus,” Dawson’s attorney, Amanda Ghannam, said in an email to The Detroit News. “She continues to believe that public employees’ free speech rights must be respected and that universities should combat all forms of prejudice on campus.”
In court documents, Dawson said that during the conference, she was approached by two women who asked her about the “antisemitic environment” at UM and she said UM “was doing its best to navigate complex issues and combat antisemitism as well as other types of prejudice on campus.” She said she was speaking as a private individual and did not “purport to speak on behalf of the University of Michigan.”
After the women berated her and pushed her to share her thoughts about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, Dawson told them that both sides have equal rights to live in the disputed region, Dawson alleged.
The women later reported the incident to the Anti-Defamation League (ADL), which in turn contacted then-UM President Santa Ono. According to the court filing, the women falsified facts in order to portray Dawson as a vehement antisemite.
UM opened an investigation which Dawson alleges was flawed, biased and inconsistent with normal university procedures. Specifically, she raised concerns that the law firm hired by UM to investigate the matter also represented the ADL.
Kumar wrote that those accusations may fare better in Dawson’s pending case at the state level.
“These allegations may very well assert violations of University employment policy and possibly of Dawson’s constitutional rights, but they carry no suggestion that the University’s violative procedures and adverse actions against her were motivated by or in any way related to her race or gender,” the judge wrote.
mreinhart@detroitnews.com
This article originally appeared on The Detroit News: Former UM DEI officer’s discrimination case dismissed
Reporting by Max Reinhart, The Detroit News / The Detroit News
USA TODAY Network via Reuters Connect
By Max Reinhart, The Detroit News | USA TODAY Network
