A cardiologist known for challenging affirmative action can proceed with a lawsuit alleging his employer violated his First Amendment rights when it removed him from a leadership position, .
Norman Wang, MD, MS, a cardiologist at the University of Pittsburgh, sued the university and a few faculty members for violating his right to free speech, after they revoked his leadership role as director of the electrophysiology fellowship program at the Heart and Vascular Institute within the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center. Wang was dismissed from his role after he published an article challenging diversity and inclusion efforts in cardiology training programs, but is still a faculty member at the university.
The original complaint alleged that the university and its employees wrongfully removed Wang from leadership and prohibited him from interacting with medical students, residents, and fellows, causing the cardiologist to suffer financial losses. Wang also sued for defamation and tortious interference against the university and several other parties, but a judge tossed those claims in previous court orders.
Following the court's ruling that Wang could proceed with his First Amendment violation claims against faculty members who acted on behalf of University of Pittsburgh, the cardiologist then refiled free speech violation claims in a against the university itself earlier this month.
Neither Wang's attorney nor the University of Pittsburgh responded to requests for comment from 鶹ý.
At the center of the lawsuit is a controversial editorial Wang published in the in March 2020, which advocated against affirmative action in cardiology training programs. The article questioned whether graduate medical training was sacrificing qualifications of trainees to increase the representation of Black and Hispanic physicians in the field, stating that "all who aspire to a profession in medicine and cardiology must be assessed as individuals on the basis of their personal merits, not their racial and ethnic identities."
The article was met with some pushback when it was originally published, but it blew up on Twitter in the summer of 2020. Several cardiologists criticized the paper, calling attention to its questionable interpretation of data and perpetuation of systemic racism. Donald Lloyd-Jones, MD, the president of the American Heart Association (AHA), questioned how the paper was even published, calling its statements "unbalanced, unscientific, and untrue."
Following the criticism, the journal in August 2020. In the retraction, the editors stated that the University of Pittsburgh informed them of "many misconceptions and misquotes and that together those inaccuracies, misstatements, and selective misreading of source materials void the paper of its scientific validity." It was around this time that Wang was removed from his leadership role.
Subsequently, the federal government sent a letter to the University of Pittsburgh in October 2020, saying that it was opening an investigation on free speech and free inquiry grounds in defense of Wang.
Wang against the University of Pittsburgh, three faculty members involved in his removal, the AHA, Wiley Publishing, and others.
He claimed that not only did they retaliate in violation of his protected speech, but also that they made defamatory statements about the article on social media, some saying that it used "misquotes, false interpretations, and racist thinking to defend a single person's conclusions." Additionally, Wang's initial complaint alleged breaches of contract, including a $1,600 payment that he made to the AHA and Wiley to publish the article, money that he said was never returned upon the article's retraction.
None of the defamation or tortious interference claims will proceed, and both Wiley and the AHA were dismissed from the case. Wang's allegations that the University of Pittsburgh and three of its faculty members retaliated in violation of his free speech continue to stand in court.