Court Opinion

ID: 9854631
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-24 06:10:37.629102+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:23:11.502280
License: Public Domain

Finley, C. J.
(concurring specially) — The United States Supreme Court has remanded this case to us to answer one and only one question. No plethora of rhetoric or logic can change this fact. The Court merely wants to know whether the state act (Laws of 1955, chapter 377 (RCW 9.81.070)), as construed or evaluated by our state supreme court, gives to Professors Nostrand and Savelle a right to a hearing before termination of employment if they refuse to execute the oath prescribed by the act.
The opinion written for the majority by Donworth, J., states unequivocally that the state subversive activities act, supra, does not in and of itself provide a right to a hearing. However, the majority opinion states with equal vigor that, in any event, the professor's, as individual employees of *138the University, would be entitled to a hearing before the tenure committee under the tenure provisions of their employment contract and regulations of the University of Washington pertaining thereto.
I agree with the majority on both scores.