Adams v. Trustees UNC Wilmington, et al. - National Association of ...

quality of publications, and 2)an applicant's cumulative recordsince the most recent promotion. (Plo's Resp. Br. 18-19, 27.)In presenting his qualifications,' plaintiff also focuses thecourt's attention on comparisons between his own research and"left-leaning research conducted by Dr. Hossfeld."(Pl.' s Resp.Br. 18, 27.)He appears to argue that the quality of Hossfeld'swritings and his own were similar in scholarly merit and onlydiffered in the relative positions of the two professors on thepolitical spectrum.Federal courts shun opportunities to second-guessdeterminations like these, which deal entirely with thescholarly merit of professors' publications. See Jimenez, 57F.3d at 376-77i Smith, 632 F.2d at 345-37i Kunda,621 F.2d at548. The question courts ask instead is "whether thepromotion was denied because of a discriminatory reason."Smith, 632 F. 2d at 346.Finding no evidence in the record tosupport plaintiff's allegations of religious discrimination, thecourt grants summary judgment in defendants' favor onplaintiff's Title VII claim.B. Plaintiff's § 1983 First Amendment ClaimsA First Amendment retaliation claim under §1983 followsthe same proof scheme as plaintiff's Title VII claim.Williamsv. Cerberonics, 871 F.2d 452, 455 (4th Cir. 1989) i Ross v.Communications Satellite Corp., 759 F.2d 355, 365 (4th Cir.32Case 7:07-cv-00064-H Document 146 Filed 03/15/2010 Page 32 of 39