[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"detail-sidebar-cat-0-en-105":3,"doc-seo-324557-105":59,"doc-detail-324557-en":124},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"success",[7,13,18,23,28,33,38,43,48,51,55],{"id":8,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":10,"show_sort_weight":11,"slug":12},1,"Document","Story & Novel",90,"story-novel",{"id":14,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":15,"show_sort_weight":16,"slug":17},2,"Literature",80,"literature",{"id":19,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":20,"show_sort_weight":21,"slug":22},4,"Exam",70,"exam",{"id":24,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":25,"show_sort_weight":26,"slug":27},5,"Comic",60,"comic",{"id":29,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":30,"show_sort_weight":31,"slug":32},6,"Technology",50,"technology",{"id":34,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":35,"show_sort_weight":36,"slug":37},7,"Healthcare",40,"healthcare",{"id":39,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":40,"show_sort_weight":41,"slug":42},8,"Research & Report",30,"research-report",{"id":44,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":45,"show_sort_weight":46,"slug":47},9,"Religion & Spirituality",20,"religion-spirituality",{"id":46,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":49,"show_sort_weight":46,"slug":50},"World Cup","world-cup",{"id":52,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":53,"show_sort_weight":52,"slug":54},10,"Lifestyle","lifestyle",{"id":56,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":57,"show_sort_weight":24,"slug":58},19,"General","general",{"code":4,"msg":60,"data":61},"ok",{"site_id":62,"language":63,"slug":64,"title":65,"keywords":66,"description":67,"schema_data":68,"social_meta":117,"head_meta":119,"extra_data":121,"updated_unix":123},105,"en","justices-turn-away-tenure-confidentiality-suit-leaving-conflict-cont","JUSTICES TURN AWAY TENURE CONFIDENTIALITY SUIT, LEAVING CONFLICT - (Cont.)","","新闻简报记录1986年6月3日美国最高法院拒绝受理一项“终身教职（tenure）保密”相关诉讼，维持下级法院判决及地区巡回法院之间的分歧。文章指出联邦调查机构可接触保密的同行推荐材料，引发对高等教育自由与求证偏差的寒蝉效应。文中同时提及对EEOC在调查就业歧视指控时所需信息范围的争论，并补充最高法院另有不审理的相关案件。",{"@graph":69,"@context":116},[70,84,99],{"@type":71,"itemListElement":72},"BreadcrumbList",[73,77,79,82],{"item":74,"name":75,"@type":76,"position":8},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",{"item":78,"name":9,"@type":76,"position":14},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/",{"item":80,"name":40,"@type":76,"position":81},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/research-report/",3,{"item":83,"name":65,"@type":76,"position":19},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/justices-turn-away-tenure-confidentiality-suit-leaving-conflict-cont/324557/",{"url":83,"name":65,"@type":85,"author":86,"headline":65,"publisher":89,"fileFormat":92,"inLanguage":63,"description":67,"dateModified":93,"datePublished":93,"encodingFormat":92,"isAccessibleForFree":94,"interactionStatistic":95},"DigitalDocument",{"name":87,"@type":88},"Emma Wilson","Person",{"url":74,"name":90,"@type":91},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-09-21",true,{"@type":96,"interactionType":97,"userInteractionCount":4},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":98},"ViewAction",{"@type":100,"mainEntity":101},"FAQPage",[102,108,112],{"name":103,"@type":104,"acceptedAnswer":105},"最高法院为什么拒绝审理该终身教职保密诉讼？","Question",{"text":106,"@type":107},"文中指出争议涉及联邦调查机构对保密的终身教职材料的可接触范围，并影响对就业歧视调查的推进与校园自由之间的平衡。","Answer",{"name":109,"@type":104,"acceptedAnswer":110},"地区巡回法院之间的主要分歧是什么？",{"text":111,"@type":107},"部分法院认为EEOC可以调取保密的终身教职评估与推荐材料以比较决策，从而判断是否存在偏差；另一部分法院则要求EEOC说明“具体需要”，并在其需求与高校保密利益之间进行权衡。",{"name":113,"@type":104,"acceptedAnswer":114},"文章还提到了哪些与教育公平相关的后续事项？",{"text":115,"@type":107},"文中提到Barbara Lerner撤回OCR提名，并呼吁建立两党总统委员会来推进教育公平研究，减少她所称的层层行政负担。","https://schema.org",{"og:url":83,"og:type":118,"og:title":65,"og:site_name":90,"og:description":67},"article",{"robots":120,"canonical":83},"index,follow",{"doc_id":122,"site_id":62},324557,1789968243,{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":125},{"doc_id":122,"user_id":126,"nickname":87,"user_avatar":127,"doc_module":4,"category_id":39,"category_name":40,"doc_title":65,"doc_description":67,"doc_content":128,"file_id":129,"file_url":130,"file_type":131,"file_size":132,"view_count":4,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":8,"is_downloadable":8,"audit_status":8,"page_count":24,"language":133,"language_code":63,"site_id":62,"html_lang":63,"table_of_contents":134,"faqs":135,"seo_title":136,"seo_description":67,"update_tm":123,"read_time":137},3848291630094,"https://eur-avatar.wpscdn.com/davatar_085a072bc5b1113ac321206ff7593b45","Tuesday,June 3,1986  \n# JUSTICES TURN AWAY TENURE CONFIDENTIALITY SUIT,LEAVING CONFLICT\n\nOver the objections of two justices,the U.S.Supreme Court yesterday refusedto review a ruling that gives federal investigators free rein in examining con-fidential faculty tenure documents,a prospect that chills some higher educa-tion advocates.  \nThe Court's action leaves intact both the lower court ruling and a direct con-flict among federal appeals courts in four regions.Two have protected theconfidentiality of peer recommendations on tenure candidates while another pairlet the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission see all documents.  \nnd rarabhalL ceolegeoc.eBoc(54 USLM 36405e,fuad sSheldon stenbach,generalcounsel of the American Council on Education.Not only did the conflict amongthe circult courts of appeals weigh in favor of a Supreme Court hearing,butthe American Association of University Professors(AAUP)and a group of 67varied colleges and universities had urged the Court to accept the case。  \nJustices Byron White and Harry Blackmun noted that they had voted to hear thesuit to resolve the conflict,but four votes are needed for a hearing.  \nDelicate Balance\"I look forward to the day when the Court will see fitto resolve the conflict\"concerning the balance between confidentiality andEEOC's needs in investigating job bias charges,said AAUP counsel Ann Franke.  \n\"If I'm a faculty member who is asked to write a letter of recommendation abouta colleague who lives in Illinois and a colleague who lives in Pennsylvania,myletters will [be accorded]different degrees of confidentiality,\"Franke added.She and Steinbach were certain a similar case will knock on the Court's door inthe future,but for now schools must obey rules that vary with geography.  \nIn Franklin and Marshal1,a divided 3rd Circuit panel said EEOC has the sub-poena power to see the confidential evaluations,recommendations and otherpapers on tenure candidates over four years.A French professor had charged hewas denied tenure because of his French national origin(HED,March 12)。  \nThe 3rd Circuit,which covers Pennsylvania,New Jersey and Delaware,acknow-leged that academic freedom,including tenure review,is a \"special concern\"ofthe First amendment,that confidential evaluations are\"central\"to that free-dom and that confidentiality is“essential”in obtaining candid evaluations,especially in intimate colleges.(more)  \nJune 3,1986  \n# JUSTICES TURN AWAY TENURE CONFIDENTIALITY SUIT(Cont.)\n\nThe panel ruled,though,that the interest in stamping out job bias calls forunfettered EEOC investigation under Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Actbecause EEOC needs to compare tenure decisions to find bias.The 11th Circuit,which covers Georgia,Alabama and Florida,issued a similar ruling in 1981.  \nBut the 2nd Circuit,which rules in New York,Vermont and Connecticut,has saidthat EEOC should show a\"particularized need\"for information,and that needshould be balanced against the college'interest in confidentiality.The 7thCircuit,which covers I1linois,Indiana and Wisconsin,took a similar tack.  \nAlso yesterday,the Court declined to hear Johnson v.Alabama Agricultural andMechanical University(54 USLW 3735),in which the Alabama Supreme Court heldthat the school's president did not violate the due process rights of a tenuredfaculty member by reviewing the professor's personnel file after an evidentiaryhearing but before the decision to dismiss the professor.--Maggie Hume  \nLERNER WITHDRAWS AS OCR NOMINEE,CALLS FOR EQUITY STUDY  \nPresident Reagan's nominee to head the Education Department's Office for Civi1Rights has withdrawn from consideration and called for a bipartisan presiden-tial commission on education equity to cut through a many-1ayered\"crust\"ofadministrative burdens that she says is stifling civil rights enforcement.  \nBarbara Lerner last week withdrew from her nomination as assistant secretaryfor civil rights and said in an interview yesterday,\"I still believe thatOCR's problems can and must be ","cbCaio3XJqlOcVD1","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCaio3XJqlOcVD1","pdf",1186712,"English","# JUSTICES TURN AWAY TENURE CONFIDENTIALITY SUIT, LEAVING CONFLICT\n## Delicate Balance\n## Conflicting Circuit Rulings\n# JUSTICES TURN AWAY TENURE CONFIDENTIALITY SUIT (Cont.)\n## Title VII Investigation vs. Confidentiality\n## Court Declines Another Case\n# LERNER WITHDRAWS AS OCR NOMINEE, CALLS FOR EQUITY STUDY","[{\"question\":\"最高法院为什么拒绝审理该终身教职保密诉讼？\",\"answer\":\"文中指出争议涉及联邦调查机构对保密的终身教职材料的可接触范围，并影响对就业歧视调查的推进与校园自由之间的平衡。\"},{\"question\":\"地区巡回法院之间的主要分歧是什么？\",\"answer\":\"部分法院认为EEOC可以调取保密的终身教职评估与推荐材料以比较决策，从而判断是否存在偏差；另一部分法院则要求EEOC说明“具体需要”，并在其需求与高校保密利益之间进行权衡。\"},{\"question\":\"文章还提到了哪些与教育公平相关的后续事项？\",\"answer\":\"文中提到Barbara Lerner撤回OCR提名，并呼吁建立两党总统委员会来推进教育公平研究，减少她所称的层层行政负担。\"}]","JUSTICES TURN AWAY TENURE CONFIDENTIALITY SUIT, LEAVING CONFLICT - (Cont.) | PDF",13]