Dr. Matthew Abraham, a tenured professor at the University of Arizona, has filed a lawsuit against the Arizona Board of Regents, accusing them of unlawful retaliation and race discrimination. The complaint was lodged in the United States District Court for the District of Arizona on November 25, 2025. Dr. Abraham alleges that he faced adverse actions after opposing what he believed were discriminatory hiring practices at the university.
According to the complaint, Dr. Abraham, who has been a faculty member since 2013 and achieved full professorship in 2016, raised concerns about hiring practices favoring diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) criteria that he believed unlawfully prioritized candidates based on race. His grievances included internal complaints, public records requests, and formal charges with the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). Following these actions, Dr. Abraham claims he was excluded from prestigious committee appointments such as the Committee on Academic Freedom and Tenure (CAFT) and the English Department Annual Performance Review Committee (APR), which he attributes to his opposition to DEI-based selection practices.
The lawsuit details how Dr. Abraham’s efforts to address these issues began in 2017 and continued through 2022, including filing a special action in Pima County Superior Court for compliance with public records laws related to hiring processes. Despite his efforts being dismissed by both trial and appellate courts, Dr. Abraham persisted in his opposition to race-based decision-making within the university’s governance structures.
Dr. Abraham’s legal representation argues that his exclusion from CAFT was pretextual and retaliatory, pointing out that UA officials manipulated eligibility criteria to exclude him due to his protected activities under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. They claim this exclusion violated his rights by disqualifying him based on alleged conflicts of interest stemming from his grievances and ongoing legal challenges.
The plaintiff seeks various forms of relief from the court: declaratory judgments affirming violations of anti-retaliation and anti-discrimination provisions under Title VII; injunctions preventing UA from using protected activities as grounds for disqualification; orders requiring UA to implement neutral selection criteria; expungement of records labeling him as problematic; consideration for leadership positions without bias; compensatory damages for emotional distress and reputational harm; attorneys’ fees; and any other appropriate relief deemed just by the court.
Representing Dr. Matthew Abraham are attorneys Aaron T. Martin and Catie B. Kelley from Martin Law & Mediation PLLC in Phoenix, Arizona, along with Angel J. Valencia from Liberty Justice Center in Austin, Texas (pro hac vice forthcoming). The case is identified as Case No. 4:25-cv-00656-EJM before Judge EJM.
Source: 425cv00656_Dr_Abraham_v_Arizona_Board_of_Regents_Complaint_District_Arizona.pdf
