It has been met because the professor "has written the President requesting that he reject the department's and Dean's negative recommendations". The operative word in this case scenario is "recommendation". The university colleagues did not fire the professor. Rather they only recommended that the professor not receive tenure.
Presumably, because this is a public university, there would be an established and published university policy that regulates academic freedom, tenure and due process. While this would seem like a broad stroke philosophy it must be detailed within the faculty and administrative guidelines or handbooks. In order to insure that students are able to advance in the knowledge and understanding of their fields, it is important that professors feel free to discuss issues without having worry about censure. Freedom of inquiry is achieved through research, discussion, and publication teaching, learning free from internal or external restraints that would unreasonably restrict their academic endeavors. Apparently the university policy is that these goals are reached through a multi disciplinary approach. Accordingly, if the professor is not willing to explore the the multidisciplinary approach then he is violating university policy. ...
In conclusion, so long as the president of the university can make his decision based upon intelligent feedback and his own wisdom, he is not abusing his discretion. He is in fact working well within his own parameters and there should be no legal consequences, whatever decision he makes. The professor would be ill advised to commence proceedings based upon this fact pattern.
In the CPM, read the case Urofsky v. Gilmore and answer Questions 2 and 3
2. The various opinions issued by the en banc court in Urofsky provide an instructive debate, and an interesting array of viewpoints, on academic freedom and professors' First Amendment free speech rights. Compare and contrast the various opinions. Which opinion, or parts of opinions, present(s) the soundest reasoning The most perceptive analysis The most constructive approach to the problem
I think that the balancing test applied in this case is a good introduction to what should be regulated, but it is not complete. It is difficult to reach a decision which maintains the equality of rights but also reasonably and realistically applies how those rights are defended. It is true that university professors are employees and that the words they speak are spoken "on company time". The fact remains however that they fit into an entirely different category from their non-faculty state employees or actors in many material points. Firstly, they are wearing two hats in the scope of their employment. They are teaching but they are also contributing through their research. It is through their research that their students and consequently the university advance. Secondly, there is not handbook that