It is beyond doubt that a state’s Constitution is fundamental for the efficient running of any country. It contains the rules and regulations that govern individuals, institutions and the country as a whole (Dewey 1966). It contains the laws that are supposed to be adhered to by the people of the nation. People who do not act as per what the Constitution states are supposed to be charged in the court of law.
In this case, the Constitution is significant in government owned institutions like universities as will be seen in the case stated below in Mountainside University. It is vital for employees in university institutions to know their rights and how to fight for them when someone tries to abuse them.
Tenure status refers to the state in which one is entitled to exercise authority on a given position (Dewey 1938). In this case, Dr.Ford’s tenure status allows her to work as a faculty member in the School of Education.
According to her tenure status, she is strictly supposed to play the role of coach or that of lecturing students undertaking education courses. She is not entitled to work in any other post in the university according to her tenure status hence she is strictly supposed to attend classes to lecture students and not play the role of the Provost’s assistant.
Property rights refer to the authority of one to own, use or even transfer goods. In this case, the property rights refer to Dr. Ford’s occupation in the university (Hooks 1994). She is supposed to teach education students in the university and earn from her job. This means that she has the right of being a lecturer in the university in the faculty of Education but not in other departments as stated in the Constitution.
She is therefore supposed to exercise her right fully and avoid being derailed in her job. She is also entitled to the property right of earning income as a lecturer in Mountainside University as a reward of her labor in the institution. She also has a property right to attend classes in the institution and instill knowledge in the minds of the students.
This means that she has been posted into the institution to lecture and not to perform any other duty besides that. She is also entitled to the right of enforcement of property rights. This means that she has the right to defend her property rights. For example she has the right to ask for space in the teaching curriculum if she is locked out of the timetable.
Liberty interest refers to the interest of denied liberty. It is the state in which a person seeks for her denied property rights in a governmental institution. For instance, in this case, Dr. Ford has a liberty interest for being denied the opportunity to exercise her duties in the faculty by the dean of Education in the university. She is seeking for her liberty in the faculty because of being marginalized as a lecturer in the faculty.
It is evident that she threatens to file a complaint in Federal Court against her deprived rights. In this case, she has all rights to exercise her liberty rights as an employee of the university because she had not committed any offense as per her alleged accusations.
Due process can be defined as the requirement that the state is expected to respect the constitutional rights that a person owns (Hooks 1994). In Dr. Ford’s situation, due process applies in the sense that she has her rights as a lecturer in the university and she is entitled to exercise her duties as a lecturer in the faculty of education.
Due process in this case helps her gain the confidence to threaten in filing a complaint in the federal court against her deprived rights as a lecturer in the university (Dewey 1966). She does not deserve being fired from the institution because she went for her legal leave.
Dr. Ford was terminated for “cause” meaning that it was unavoidable for her to be terminated as the assistant Provost because she had been appointed “….at the pleasure of the Provost”.
This means that she got the position informally and the government had posted a formal employee to the post hence she had no choice but step aside. I agree with this because she was operating at the wrong post despite being appointed by the Provost.
According to Kaplin and Lee text, a person has a “standing to litigate” if the plaintiff suffers an injury with causation and that the court of law can redress the injury. In this case, Dr. Ford has a “standing to litigate” as she suffers being terminated from being an assistant provost and also has been fired as lecturer from Mountainside University. She is not guilty of the offense because she followed rules from the Provost.
In conclusion, it is fundamental for people to know their constitutional rights for them not to be deprived their property rights. This will help them make right decisions in any occupation hence avoid suffering. Dr. Ford suffered because she did not know or think of the repercussions associated with being appointed “at the pleasure of the Provost”.
References
Dewey, J. (1938). Experience and education. New York: Macmillan.
Dewey, J. (1966). Democracy and education: An introduction to the philosophy of education. New York: The Free Press.
Hooks, B. (1994). Teaching to transgress: Education as the practice of freedom. New York: Routledge.