University of Michigan Discriminatory Firing?

If you haven't heard about Hammer v. University of Michigan yet, I have a feeling it won't be long before you will. I think this story will start gaining interest now that the case has been remanded back to the trial court. This site hosts all the pleadings filed thus far in the case as well as a valuable background on the case courtesy of Wayne State University Law School OUTlaws; the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, and Allies organization. In part,

The Complaint alleges a simple “breach of contract” theory, predicated on representations of non-discrimination during pre-employment negotiations, as well as University policies and by-laws prohibiting discrimination on the basis of sexual-orientation. Rather than building an affirmative case that no discrimination took place, the University’s initial stance was to maintain that its by-laws and non-discrimination policies had no legal meaning and created no rights. The same University that had defended the value of diversity in the U.S. Supreme Court was now vigorously defending its legal right to discriminate on whatever basis it wanted.

In my limited free time today, I began reading Mr. Hammer's transcript and some of the exhibits filed by UofM. It is all very interesting. What really caught my attention was UofM's position that their non-discrimination policy did not constitute a legal contract. If I had more time today I would have done some (limited) research to see, just out of curiosity, if this defense had ever been successful before.

Thanks to Feminist Law Professors for the initial mention of this story.