FEATURED
Key Takeaways
- Matthew Abraham, a former University of Arizona professor, is appealing his termination over alleged violations of university policy, claiming it was retaliatory due to his criticism of DEI policies.
- Abraham was dismissed after the provost overruled a faculty committee that recommended against his firing, which concluded he had performed his duties well and had legitimate reasons for outside employment.
- The university cited outside employment as a reason for Abraham's dismissal, but he argues that these claims were used to target him amid a public records lawsuit regarding DEI practices.
- The case raises questions about due process rights for faculty, the authority of faculty committees versus university administration, and the potential chilling effect on academic freedom.
A former University of Arizona professor who challenged DEI policies is appealing to the Pima County Superior Court after the school’s provost overruled a faculty committee and terminated him.
Matthew Abraham, who was dismissed by the University of Arizona last September, is asking a court to review the Arizona Board of Regents and the university’s decisions to fire him, according to a notice of appeal shared with The College Fix.
The court will determine whether Abraham’s 14th Amendment due process rights were fully respected and if he was given proper hearings before and after his termination.
The university claimed Abraham was dismissed for holding outside employment, disrupting departmental operations, and sending inappropriate emails. Abraham believes the real reason was his opposition to DEI policies.
University spokesperson Mieczyslaw Zak told The Fix the school fired the professor because he held outside employment — positions with the city of Tucson and the state’s Attorney General’s Office — that “interfered with his duties as a full-time tenured faculty member.”
According to the notice of appeal, the dean also alleged that Abraham disrupted departmental operations and sent inappropriate emails.
Abraham told The Fix that a faculty committee unanimously rejected the university’s decision to fire him in December. The committee found that Abraham had performed his teaching and administrative duties properly, received exceptional evaluations, that his outside employment was a legitimate policy dispute, and that the required conciliation process had never taken place.
However, university Provost Patricia Prelock ultimately decided against the committee’s recommendation and moved forward with his dismissal.
“The Provost did not attend the two-day hearing and did not identify any additional evidence that the Panel did not consider,” the appeal states.
Abraham said that others within the university hold outside employment, including full-time positions, and no one else has been fired for this reason.
Abraham believes the Board of Regents developed a plan around a year ago to force him out because they knew the public records lawsuit would be accepted by the Arizona Supreme Court, which was heard on Nov. 24, 2025.
“(The University) had reason to want to squeeze me on this, because of the public records lawsuit,” he told The Fix.
The professor filed multiple public records requests seeking transparency about how DEI criteria were being used in faculty hiring decisions. The decision in the lawsuit has not yet been publicly released.
“They wanted to throw a bunch of things at me and then see what they could get to stick. And you know, the committee didn’t buy it,” he said. “But … under the structure, the committee’s recommendation is merely advisory to the president.”
“We’re sticking to the notion that tenure is a property right, and it can’t be so easily taken away,” Abraham said, claiming that the school didn’t go through the same post-termination proceedings that are usually presented to dismissed faculty members.
In most cases, the dean who brought the recommendation will usually discuss it with the faculty member whose dismissal is being considered before escalating to dismissal proceedings. But that the same process was not presented to him, he said.
“This dispute should have never resulted in a dismissal recommendation,” he said. “And so there’s something else driving this.”
Zach Greenberg, director of faculty legal defense at the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression, told The College Fix that while holding another full-time position that interferes with university duties can be grounds for dismissal, faculty committees should carry significant weight.
“Such committees should have substantial weight as the voice of the faculty,” Greenberg said, “but the decision ultimately rests with the university administration as the employer.”
