A racial discrimination case filed by a white administrator who claims Rochester Institute of Technology wrongly used “diversity metrics” to hire a Black candidate instead of her may proceed to a jury trial, a federal judge has ruled.
U.S. District Judge Elizabeth Wolford determined in her Sept. 4 ruling that there were “numerous genuine and material factual issues” as to whether RIT’s stated reasons for not hiring Dr. Jessica Ecock-Rotondo were pretextual.
Based on the court record, the Court could not conclude that no reasonable jury could find in favor of RIT, the judge wrote.
“On the other hand, the Court cannot conclude the opposite,” Wolford stated in denying both parties’ motions for summary judgment on Ecock-Rotondo’s racial discrimination claim, one of several in the case. The judge added that a reasonable jury could find that the plaintiff’s race and/or national origin were “motivating factors” in the hiring decision.
The lawsuit – which Ecock-Rotondo filed in 2023 in the United States District Court for the Western District of New York – alleges that RIT used an “applicant tracker” in the screening process that listed diversity metrics such as the candidate’s race and gender.
The court notes that much of the information that Ecock-Rotondo cites regarding the search and hiring process is “simply related to the school’s commitment to diversity.”
“University and departmental policies promoting diverse hiring, standing alone, do not equate to unlawful selection criteria,” Wolford wrote of Ecock-Rotondo’s assertion that the search process was tainted from the start.
Ecock-Rotondo has alleged further that a member of the hiring committee stated that they “weren’t only going to bring two white women to campus and not bring this black man” in for an interview. RIT has countered that the comment was a “stray remark” and not evidence of discrimination.
Ecock-Rotondo’s case is progressing through court at a time when institutions of higher education are under increased scrutiny from the Trump administration for diversity, equity and inclusion practices that the administration considers illegal due to the 2023 Supreme Court ruling that banned the use of race in college admissions. It also comes as institutions continue to wrestle with whether and to what extent they articulate and implement diversity goals without running afoul of the administration’s interpretation of the law.
An online federal court database did not indicate the next court date for Ecock-Rotondo’s case.
Jamaal Abdul-Alim is a longtime education writer who resides in Washington, D.C. He occasionally teaches journalism and has completed fellowships at the University of Michigan, Columbia University and New America.
