Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

Fired Oberlin College Prof. Joy Karega, who spread anti-Semitic conspiracy theories, amends discrimination lawsuit

Fired Oberlin College Prof. Joy Karega, who spread anti-Semitic conspiracy theories, amends discrimination lawsuit

Files First Amended Complaint after Oberlin College filed a partial motion to dismiss.

Joy Karega is the former Oberlin College professor of social justice writing caused enormous controversy when her anti-Semitic conspiracy theories spread on Facebook were revealed.

We covered the story initially, on March 1, 2016, Oberlin anti-Semitic rant Prof hosting BDS event this week.

We continued to cover as events unfolded on campus:

This all culminated in her termination, Oberlin College fires Prof. Joy Karega after antisemitic Facebook posts. The following statement was issued by Oberlin on November 15:

The Oberlin College Board of Trustees, after extensive consideration and a comprehensive review of recommendations from multiple faculty committees and Oberlin President Marvin Krislov, has voted to dismiss Assistant Professor of Rhetoric and Composition Joy D. Karega for failing to meet the academic standards that Oberlin requires of its faculty and failing to demonstrate intellectual honesty.

The dismissal is effective Tuesday, November 15, 2016.

As a Board, we agree with President Krislov and every faculty committee reviewing this matter that the central issues are Dr. Karega’s professional integrity and fitness. We affirm Oberlin’s historic and ongoing commitment to academic freedom.

During this process, which began with Dr. Karega’s posting of anti-Semitic writings on social media, Dr. Karega received numerous procedural protections: she was represented by counsel; she presented witness testimony, documents, and statements to support her position; and she had the opportunity to cross-examine witnesses testifying against her.

The faculty review process examined whether Dr. Karega had violated the fundamental responsibilities of Oberlin faculty members – namely, adherence to the “Statement of Professional Ethics” of the American Association of University Professors, which requires faculty members to “accept the obligation to exercise critical self-discipline and judgment in using, extending and transmitting knowledge” and to “practice intellectual honesty.”

Contrary to this obligation, Dr. Karega attacked her colleagues when they challenged inconsistencies in her description of the connection between her postings and her scholarship. She disclaimed all responsibility for her misconduct. And she continues to blame Oberlin and its faculty committees for undertaking a shared governance review process.

For these reasons, the faculty review committees and President Krislov agreed on the seriousness of Dr. Karega’s misconduct. Indeed, the majority of the General Faculty Council, the executive body of Oberlin’s faculty, concluded that Dr. Karega’s postings could not be justified as part of her scholarship and had “irreparably impaired (her) ability to perform her duties as a scholar, a teacher, and a member of the community.”

In the face of Dr. Karega’s repeated refusal to acknowledge and remedy her misconduct, her continued presence undermines the mission and values of Oberlin’s academic community. Thus, any sanction short of dismissal is insufficient and the Board of Trustees is compelled to take this most serious action.

In November 2018, Karega sued alleging she was the victim of discrimination, filing a Complaint (pdf.)(full embed at bottom of post) in federal court in Ohio:

9. During or about the period commencing during or about
March, 2016 through the conclusion of employment of Plaintiff,
defendant, Oberlin College, through its administrative officials,
including, but not limited to President Krislov and Dean Elgrin,
among others not named at this time, engaged in an unrelenting and
pervasive conspiracy to terminate the employment of Plaintiff.
10. The conduct of defendant Oberlin, through its agents
was done without cause or justification.

On February 11, 2019, Oberlin and the other defendants filed a Partial Motion to Dismiss (pdf.) the Complaint:

Plaintiff fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted with respect to Counts I,
II, and IV in part. As to Count I, first, the Individual Defendants cannot be held individually or
personally liable for Defendant Oberlin’s alleged breach of contract, and Plaintiff alleges no facts
supporting a theory that the Individual Defendants contracted with Plaintiff and breached such
contracts. Second, punitive and emotional distress damages are not available for breach of
contract claims. Regarding Counts II and IV, Plaintiff cannot claim that the Individual
Defendants are personally liable under Title VII as a matter of law. Finally, Plaintiff fails to
articulate a plausible claim for relief under the Civil Rights Acts of 1866 and 1870.

On February 25, 2019, Karega filed a First Amended Complaint (pdf.)(full embed at bottom of post).

A comparison report (pdf.) generated by Adobe Acrobat allows you to view the complaints side-by-side.

There aren’t many changes in the First Amended Complaint.

For Count III, Karega no longer claims a violation of the Civil Rights Acts of 1866 and 1870, instead claiming a violation of the Civil Rights Acts of 1991:

So expect Oberlin to renew its partial motion to dismiss, addressing this substitute claim as well.

Depending on what the case looks like after the partial motion to dismiss finally is resolved, there may be discovery. While Karega undoubtedly is looking forward to digging through the college’s files, I have a feeling Karega’s files and emails, which will be subject to discovery as well, will be much more interesting.

We will continue to follow the case.


Joy Karega v. Oberlin College – First Amended Complaint by Legal Insurrection on Scribd


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


Joy? Her momma has a sense of humor.

JusticeDelivered | February 26, 2019 at 5:42 pm

Cases like this send a clear message to employers.

JusticeDelivered | February 26, 2019 at 6:32 pm

She would be right at home with Gypsies or Travelers, both of whom survive and prosper with con jobs.

She’s an a-hole. But no worse an a-hole than the people who hired her to begin with. But the biggest a-holes of all: kids and their parents who went into hock to pay for an education from the likes of this fraud.

Who says student debt is a bad thing? Snowflake voters caught in the leftist scam of education debt just might set things right. Here’s an idea: legislation forcing schools offering scam courses like this to pay the debts of students who paid for them.

At least she idn’t blame Trump.

    Tom Servo in reply to MajorWood. | February 27, 2019 at 8:32 am

    Well you know I’ve heard that the JOOS really DO have a Giant Sekrit Weather Machine! that controls all of the World’s weather! Anytime it snows too much, or rains too much, or gets too hot, or doesn’t rain enough, that’s who to blame! Even the Iranian Government says so! (/sarc)

When you’ve convinced millions of people to accept a lifetime of debt in order to attain meaningless degrees, you eventually have to scrape the bottom of the barrel to find enough “educators” to go around.

That is the sort of trash that you will get when you hire or admit on the basis of skin color. I never knew “social justice writing” was aa academic field. Isn’t Oberrlin facing a suit for defamation by a local bakery that had been libeled for having a number of OPberlin affirmative action types xafredstedd for shoplifting.when all they wanted was reparations for slavery.

As an alumnus, I side with the college here in the suit, but also as an alumnus, I have to wonder WTF she doing there in the first place. To me it is like the Neuroscience Department actually hiring Dr. Venkman.* It seems to me that these schools are losing their relevance by trying to be relevant, but in the wrong way. It is almost like people are now making careers out of what my generation and before just considered as volunteer activities.


I guess this is the next target now that Animal House has had all of the humor squeezed out of it by the SJW crowd.

Wow! Is this woman ever nuts!!
But one wonders, how could there have been no evidence of this before she was hired? And if there was, who ignored such evidence?