On a cold January day in Lyon County, Kansas, a jury delivered a verdict that reverberated far beyond a single campus dispute—awarding more than $5 million to a longtime university professor who said his career was dismantled because of his religious practice.
The judgment against Emporia State University marked one of the most significant religious discrimination verdicts in Kansas higher education in recent memory.
On January 21, jurors found that the university and two senior administrators unlawfully discriminated against Dr. Dusti Howell, a tenured professor of Instructional Design and Technology, after he took time off to observe religious holidays he had marked for decades. The award—$5,181,344.55 in compensatory and punitive damages—followed a trial that began January 12 and traced how routine accommodation gave way to discipline, isolation, and what Howell’s attorney described as a forced exit from academia.
“They just made his life miserable because of his religious practice.”
The verdict carries broader implications at a moment when religious accommodation standards have been recalibrated nationwide. Jurors concluded that Emporia State violated the Kansas Preservation of Religious Freedom Act, the Kansas Act Against Discrimination and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, underscoring that public employers face strict obligations to justify any denial of religious accommodation.
Howell had spent more than 20 years teaching at Emporia State and had held tenure for 12 of them by the time the conflict erupted in 2020. A member of a nondenominational church that observes holidays overlapping with the Jewish calendar, Howell had long taken brief, preplanned absences—an arrangement that had never drawn formal objection. That changed after he returned from observing the Feast of Tabernacles, a religious conference he said he had attended since childhood and throughout his career at the university.
“I came back from a one-week church conference, which I’ve gone to since I was 6 years old and for 23 years at Emporia State,” Howell said. “They said, ‘You can’t do that anymore, not without getting an eight-week, preapproved notice from HR, and the dean and your chair.’”
The contrast with secular travel was stark. When he asked whether attending a technology conference would require similar advance approval, he recalled being told, “Oh, yeah, you don’t even need to tell us. Just go. But if you’re gone for a church conference, gone for one day for church, yeah, you need eight weeks preapproval. We’ll let you know whether you can go or not.”
University officials justified the discipline by pointing to two missed class sessions during Howell’s absence—classes covering green screen technology. Howell said that he had arranged for his graduate teaching assistant to lead those sessions, a practice he described as commonplace in higher education.
“She was probably the best graduate teaching assistant I’ve had there in 23 years,” Howell said, adding that she was a former department head at a university in India. “She was fantastic as a graduate teaching assistant, but I was chastised for allowing a graduate teaching assistant to teach in my class.”
From that point forward, the lawsuit alleged, the university escalated its response. In a letter dated November 4, 2020, then-Dean Joan Brewer disciplined Howell based on claims the jury later heard were factually incorrect. According to the complaint, Brewer asserted Howell had been absent for “weeks,” failed to respond to emails for extended periods and improperly placed himself on leave—allegations Howell disputed point by point. The filing stated that the absences cited were shorter than claimed and that no written policy supported the procedural demands imposed on him.
The dispute widened beyond a single professor. Court filings introduced evidence that Emporia State lacked any formal policy for accommodating religious observances and had previously resisted such accommodations for students. In 2016, the university considered adopting a written policy on religious absences, according to the filings, but the faculty senate declined to enact it, leaving accommodation decisions to ad hoc administrative discretion.
As the case progressed, Howell said the consequences compounded. He was removed from graduate-level teaching, excluded from departmental email chains and later reprimanded for missing meetings he said he had never been informed about in the first place. His attorney, Linus Baker, argued these actions were designed to create a record of noncompliance that would justify his termination.
“It was a constructive discharge,” Baker said, describing a situation in which an employer makes conditions so intolerable that resignation becomes inevitable. “I mean, they just made his life miserable because of his religious practice.”
The verdict does not restore his position, but it does restore, in legal terms, what the jury determined was taken wrongfully.
The legal strategy intersected with a major shift in federal law. Baker asked the court to pause the litigation while the US Supreme Court considered Groff v. DeJoy, a case that re-examined how employers assess religious accommodation. In 2023, the Supreme Court ruled unanimously that employers must show “substantial increased costs” to deny an accommodation, rejecting decades of precedent that had allowed denials based on minimal burdens.
Baker told reporters at the time that Emporia State’s own history undermined any claim of hardship. The university had accommodated Howell’s observances for years, he said, and only reversed course after a change in leadership. “That’s something he has practiced habitually since he was there,” Baker said. “When he hired on, it was understood, right? So, I mean, it’s not like he had some epiphany during his employment where he changed the rules of the game.”
Jurors ultimately agreed, awarding roughly $2.1 million in compensatory damages, including for lost pay and benefits Howell would have earned had he not been forced out, along with $3 million in punitive damages intended to sanction the conduct. Additional attorney’s fees are expected, and the university has indicated it plans to appeal.
For higher education administrators, the verdict lands as a cautionary signal. Public universities, often balancing scheduling demands against faculty autonomy, operate squarely within constitutional and statutory civil rights frameworks. The jury’s finding suggests that informal practices and unwritten expectations cannot substitute for lawful accommodation processes—especially when religious exercise is involved.
He resigned after being reassigned to teach only freshman courses, believing termination was imminent. The verdict does not restore his position, but it does restore, in legal terms, what the jury determined was taken wrongfully.
As the case moves toward appeal, its legacy may extend beyond Kansas. In an era of renewed scrutiny on religious liberty in the workplace, the Howell verdict reinforces that accommodation is not discretionary goodwill but a legal obligation.
For institutions navigating cultural and administrative change, the message from Lyon County is clear: Longstanding practice and basic accuracy matter. So does religious freedom—and when it is treated as optional, the cost can be measured not only in reputational damage but in millions of dollars.
----------------------------
A former Emporia State University professor has won his religious discrimination lawsuit against the university.
A Lyon County jury earlier this week awarded Dr. Dusti Howell $5,181,344.55 in compensatory and punitive damages, finding the university violated Howell’s rights under the Kansas Preservation of Religious Freedom act and the Kansas Act Against Discrimination as well as Federal Title VII protections.
The jury said Emporia State and administrators Joan Brewer and Jim Persinger now owe Howell some $2.1 million in compensatory damages — pay he would have been entitled to had he not been forced out — and $3 million in punitive damages. That figure will likely go higher when the judge awards attorney’s fees and other punitive damages.
Lyon County radio station KOVE reports an appeal is likely.
Howell, who had been a professor in Instructional Design and Technology at Emporia State University for over two decades — and tenured for 12 years — returned from celebrating the “Feast of Tabernacles” in 2020 to a “conference” with the now-former Dean of the Teacher’s College, Joan Brewer, and now-retired interim IDT department chair Jim Persinger.
“I came back from a one-week church conference, which I’ve gone to since I was six years old and for 23 years at Emporia State — Feast of Tabernacles,” Dusti Howell said. “They said ‘you can’t do that anymore, not without getting an 8-week, preapproved notice from HR, and the dean and your chair.”
“I asked if I could go to a tech conference,” he said. “‘Oh, yeah, you don’t even need to tell us, just go.’ But if you’re gone for a church conference, gone for one day for church. ‘Yeah, you need eight weeks pre-approval. We’ll let you know whether you can go or not.’”
The reason for this? According to Howell, he’d missed two classes — a Tuesday and a Thursday — during which students were to learn to use green-screen technology. However, Howell had already planned to have his graduate teaching assistant cover those days — something common at any university.
“She was probably the best graduate teaching assistant I’ve had there in 23 years,” Howell said, noting that the TA was a former head of department at a university in India and was attending ESU while her daughter was in the nursing program.
“She was fantastic as a graduate teaching assistant, but I was chastised for allowing a graduate teaching assistant to teach in my class,” Howell said. “Wow, really, you can’t use them to teach at all?”
This was the beginning of what the lawsuit alleges is a years-long effort to force Howell out — including multiple false claims against him. (More to this story is on the link above)
-------------------------
15 comments:
On the one hand, this is Armstrongism. So, bleah! Still, I just hope the good Doctor does not allow himself to be pressured into donating the awarded moneys to his ACOG before the appeals are exhausted and the check is cashed and the funds are in his bank. That would constitute double abuse! Depending on which ACOG is involved, the leaders might expect "their" funds immediately. If so, a pox on their houses! Usually those who would make such demands are the unhinged false prophets anyway, so perhaps it's time to seek out a new church acronym, one with a fresh first letter, or suffix?
In actuality, reality is that if we expect to be accommodated, and treated equitably and ethically ourselves, we should always raise our voices to defend others from injustice, prejudice, and bigotry. Armstrongism, for most of us,
would be a very poor test case, but you can't just turn fairness off and on. You are either fair, or you are unfair. So you gotta include them in the fairness equation!
I once was fired, ostensibly for declining to work on the sabbath. I have never bragged about that part of my dossier, because the fact was, I really had not been a valuable or model employee for that employer. The sabbath was just the obvious pretense. So, I always wonder about other sabbath-firings. We were, after all, a strange and peculiar people! We made ourselves easy targets.
BB
Howell attends a small independent COG, not one of the megacorporations. It'll be interesting to see whether this windfall affects the group's expectations of him. It wouldn't surprise me if he's no longer attending that group in a year or two.
I recall a court case initiated by a high school student. The judge pointed out that many teachers think that schools are somehow separate from society, with teachers being basically above the law. This is often the case in workplaces and especially churches. It's good to see the legal system fighting back.
The church - Kansas City Church of God - https://www.kccog.org/ -
is the antithesis of Armstrongism. In this short video one of the elders (all volunteers) explains why the church was founded -
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QHIe0mOOBnQ
If it's an offshoot of Armstrongism, I don't trust them. Even if they intellectually perceive the failings of the mother church, the old habits are deeply ingrained. The danger of bait and switch is always there. Even Herb behaved himself in the early days when his congregation was small. That all changed when his wife died and the church had grown in numbers.
It is just another splinter of Armstrongism. They may sound more collegial, but be wary of them.
Good thing he does not need to tithe over the lump sum since not any of it is obtained by "the fruits of his labor."
nck
1) I say good on him! I hope he invests his winnings wisely for his family’s future.
2) The double standard as he relates if it was for a secular event highlights the double minded culture we live in. So what if he was Jewish and was taking those days off would they have required advanced approval or what if he was Muslim? So anyway I for one am happy for him!
3) Like others have stated tho I hope he doesn’t think he needs to tithe the money to his church. And if he knew he didn’t need to go to some “conference” all these years to observe God’s festivals hopefully he’ll start to question this over-demanding man-made tradition of HWA now that so many people in WCG offshoots are completely unaware they are living under such legacy and need to “come out” of like all Christians God calls to “come out” of this modern global Babylon.
Even Herb behaved himself in the early days when his congregation was small. That all changed when his wife died and the church had grown in numbers.
This. Watch for this "antithesis of Armstrongism" group to start preaching the importance of meticulous tithing on monetary increase, including court settlements. It's easy to be collegial when the stakes are low, but I'm sure there are "well-meaning" leaders in this group who have definite ideas about how their church could "help people better" if it received a quick half-million dollars given by an obligated tither.
Do you think the Leadership of whatever COG he attends is going to want 1st, 2nd, and 3rd tithe all at once? And don't forget excess 2nd tithe.
You mean it's not labor to keep the sabbath and feasts, nck? Being a "Church of .Goddian" really complicates your life and adds to the angst of existence and workload. If you have the entire ACOG hierarchy inserting itself into the normal power structures society inflicts, sometimes it just makes you want to leave a flaming bag of doggie do do on the minister's front porch and ring the doorbell. These days, I'd advise caution, though. Minister might have a doorbell camera, so be sure to wear your Donald Trump mask.
Part 1 of 2
There is no tithe due unless he made an oath to the Creator and it is not due to a church organization because no organization has taken over the role from the temple / tabernacle system which the scripture clearly shows. Additionally, a simple thought process shows this. The temple existed until around 70 CE. If a Jewish person living in Israel was a believer in the Messiah, he had to tithe according to the directives of scripture. It is Torah. He had to do it. Period.
No one can say he had to do that and then do it again to the new group to which was was attached. Forget about those who would say, "Well, if he was in gentile land, he had to tithe there. There is no biblical tithe in lands outside of Israel unless he chooses to do it, but again, not to a church to run itself and pay its leaders. Remember that Paul was thanking believers for their voluntary donations to others in need and not requiring it along with other lies these orgs want people to believe so they can get cash for themselves since they run the orgs.
Synagogues have memberships, etc. which people can choose to pay (not that those who are poor are excluded) and the custom of giving ~10% has been around these groups for years, but there is no tithe required like some of these acogs. (There may be some exceptions in some groups, Jewish or christian, but it is not the law of the Creator).
If he made an oath to give it to that organization, it could be because he was made to believe that it is required based on scripture. It is not.
He should not be tithing to an organization that lies about the word of the Creator. The Creator does not want that. Maybe he should continue to tithe because he told the Creator he would, but he should give to some other group and that would be one that does things like feeds those who actually need it (not lazy bums who go to food donation sites) or to a group that provides medical care and help like for elderly, those with children who need help, etc. In other words, an organization that gives material help to those in need like giving to the fatherless and the widows.
Part 2 of 2
Tithing to a church group so it can have a building, etc. should not even go to keep the lights on. That can be a donation if one wants to do that, but it is not a tithe and should not be designated as such. The groups listed above would use tithes for that, but they are doing something of service like medical, food, a place to live and be warm.
Paying for some to talk in a church is not material. Those buildings, so-called programs, etc. are not needed. People can meet in homes, etc. and not have to have a building to rent, own, maintain, etc. and they certainly do not need to pay humans to spread the truth in this day and age. The tithe is for the temple and priesthood in Israel, not for church buildings and so-called ministers. If the temple comes back, the tithe will be for it again because the temple serves a purpose which the Creator explains in scripture.
Additionally, those organizations and individuals who have taken tithe money for ownership or rent payments, utilities, salaries, etc. which was never theirs and never will be should pay it back if they are true believers like Zacchaeus who told the Messiah he would pay back any person fourfold who he may have stiffed. That being said, the ones I read about just talk about how it was wrong and people were taken advantage of, blah blah blah, but they do not admit they were wrong and start paying it back.
In other words, they know it is wrong, but oh well, can't do anything about it now. The past is the past so keep denying the actual truth of the Creator who has provided the Torah which starts in the first five books of scripture and lump that in with the evil, perverted system they were a part of (which had and still has great differences from the actual Torah) and made money from while still acting as some educated, caring soul who wants to steer others clear of harm (which again, they were part of and still have not made any effort to pay back real money to repent).
12:45 said: “…If the temple comes back, the tithe will be for it again because the temple serves a purpose which the Creator explains in scripture.”
True and if it does tithing was never on, is not now on, and never will be on money. It was only even on agricultural produce and livestock.
I cannot understand why people insist on tithing to known false prophets. Anyone who teaches the false theory of British Israelism as part of prophecy is not worthy to receive tithes. I think God knew that the false prophets of our era would center their message primarily on the Old Testament, the Old Covenant, which is why He placed His warning in Deuteronomy!
Post a Comment