William Felkner v. Rhode Island College, 21-267

Background

Plaintiff William Felkner, a conservative MSW student at Rhode Island College, complained of pervasive liberal bias in courses, was restricted from advocating his preferred positions in class projects, received failing marks on group assignments, and recorded a professor without consent.
An Academic Standing Committee found that Felkner violated the NASW Code of Ethics for deceptive recording and required him to promise to stop such recordings or face dismissal; he later obtained a field placement in the governor’s office but experienced delays completing his integrative project.
Felkner sued RIC and individual faculty/administrators in 2007 under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 alleging First and Fourteenth Amendment violations (viewpoint discrimination, retaliation, compelled speech, and unconstitutional conditions), seeking damages and equitable relief.
The Superior Court granted summary judgment to defendants; this Court in Felkner I (203 A.3d 433 (R.I. 2019)) affirmed several rulings but vacated summary judgment as to various First Amendment claims and remanded, instructing the trial court to consider qualified immunity.
On remand the Superior Court granted summary judgment for the individual defendants based on qualified immunity; Felkner appealed, and the Rhode Island Supreme Court affirmed, holding that the law was not clearly established and that a reasonable educator would not have had fair warning their actions violated constitutional rights.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the hearing justice disregarded this Court’s mandate on remand	Lynch Prata exceeded Felkner I by finding defendants did not violate constitutional rights	Hearing justice properly applied Felkner I and addressed qualified immunity as directed	Held for defendants; no violation of mandate — qualified immunity analysis was appropriate
Whether defendants are entitled to qualified immunity for damages claims under § 1983	Felkner: his First Amendment rights were clearly established and immunity should not apply	Defendants: precedent favored deference to academic judgments; no clearly established right	Held for defendants: law not clearly established as to academic-decision First Amendment claims; qualified immunity applies
Whether qualified immunity is unavailable for equitable relief or claims against RIC as an institutional defendant	Felkner: equitable claims remain and immunity should not bar relief; insurance negates immunity	Defendants: RIC (state actor) is not a “person” under § 1983 for damages; qualified immunity applies to individual-capacity claims; insurance irrelevant	Held: equitable and RIC claims were previously waived; RIC not a § 1983 person; qualified immunity applies to individual defendants; insurance irrelevant
Whether the hearing justice improperly resolved genuine issues of material fact on summary judgment	Felkner: the court resolved factual disputes instead of leaving them for trial	Defendants: facts taken in light most favorable to plaintiff still do not demonstrate clearly established law	Held: de novo review supports summary judgment; no genuine issue of law defeating qualified immunity

Key Cases Cited

Wilson v. Layne, 526 U.S. 603 (Sup. Ct.) (qualified immunity shields officials unless rights were clearly established)
Harlow v. Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800 (Sup. Ct.) (objective standard for qualified immunity)
Messerschmidt v. Millender, 565 U.S. 535 (Sup. Ct.) (qualified immunity protects all but the plainly incompetent)
Ashcroft v. al-Kidd, 563 U.S. 731 (Sup. Ct.) (clarifies requirement that law be clearly established)
Pearson v. Callahan, 555 U.S. 223 (Sup. Ct.) (qualified-immunity two-step framework)
Saucier v. Katz, 533 U.S. 194 (Sup. Ct.) (framework on constitutional violation and clearly established law)
Tinker v. Des Moines Indep. Cmty. Sch. Dist., 393 U.S. 503 (Sup. Ct.) (student First Amendment rights in schools)
Hazelwood Sch. Dist. v. Kuhlmeier, 484 U.S. 260 (Sup. Ct.) (educators may restrict school-sponsored student speech for pedagogical reasons)
Board of Curators v. Horowitz, 435 U.S. 78 (Sup. Ct.) (deference to academic judgments on grades and progression)
Regents v. Ewing, 474 U.S. 214 (Sup. Ct.) (courts should not second-guess academic decisions absent substantial departure from norms)
Felkner v. Rhode Island College, 203 A.3d 433 (R.I. 2019) (prior appeal: vacated summary judgment on certain First Amendment claims and remanded for qualified-immunity analysis)
Ensey v. Culhane, 727 A.2d 687 (R.I. 1999) (state recognition that qualified immunity may apply)