Lawsuits
Swipe sideways to see the whole diagram, or open it full size.
Federal Suspension Case
In November 2025, I sued University of Kentucky officials in federal court to stop their investigation of my speech and to end my suspension from teaching and my ban from the law building (the latter has since been lifted), which the University imposed after I posted my petition for international military action to end Israel to AALS discussion lists. Woodcock v. Capilouto, No. 5:25-cv-00424 (E.D. Ky.).
Filings in this case are collected here.
Sixth Circuit Appeal in Federal Suspension Case
The District Court in the Federal Suspension Case initially abstained. I appealed, and the Sixth Circuit reversed in August 2026 and sent the case back for a ruling on my motion to end the investigation and return to teaching. Woodcock v. Capilouto, No. 26-5057 (6th Cir.).
Filings in this appeal are collected here.
State Suspension Case
Because federal courts cannot hear state-law claims against state officials, I brought my contract, Kentucky Campus Free Speech Protection Act, Kentucky Civil Rights Act, and Kentucky constitutional claims against the investigation and suspension in state court. The case was filed in Fayette Circuit Court in July 2026, transferred to Franklin Circuit Court (Nos. 26-CI-01010 and 26-CI-01017), and consolidated with the state dean case (of which see below).
Filings in this case are collected here.
Federal Dean Case (Voluntarily Dismissed)
In July 2026, I sued to block the University’s appointment of Gregory Van Tatenhove as dean of the law school over the faculty’s objection that he is unqualified. The appointment violates my First Amendment right of expressive association because I joined the faculty in part to send the message that my scholarship is subject to the review of peer scholars. I voluntarily dismissed the case in August 2026 and refiled it in state court. Woodcock v. Van Tatenhove, No. 5:26-cv-00262 (E.D. Ky.).
Filings in this case are collected here.
State Dean Case
My challenge to the dean appointment under the Kentucky Constitution and the University’s contractual commitment to accreditation standards. Franklin Circuit Court No. 26-CI-00885.
Filings in this case are collected here.
The major filings in all cases are provided below.
-
Sixth Circuit Denies the University’s Petition for Rehearing
The University petitioned for panel rehearing. The Sixth Circuit denied the petition, and Judge Gilman concurred to say that the opinion leaves the District Court free to decide how to proceed on remand. The same day, the court denied my motion for immediate issuance of the mandate. Update: The mandate issued on September 18, 2026.
-
Verified Complaint and Motion for a Temporary Restraining Order
The University left the Fayette court’s order transferring the case to Franklin Circuit Court unentered for a month. With the investigation resuming, and with the automatic stay on issuance of the Sixth Circuit’s mandate leaving me no way to seek a return to teaching in federal court for the fall semester, I refiled the same…
-
Response to Motion to Dismiss
The University argues that I lack standing because the rights I assert belong to the faculty as a whole. I explain that my expressive-association, contract, and other claims are personal to me.
-
Notice of New Development
I told the Sixth Circuit that, as soon as it ruled, the University ended the pause in the investigation it had maintained throughout the appeal, and that the investigator refused to extend my deadline to answer her questions.
-
Motion for Immediate Issuance of the Mandate
I asked the Sixth Circuit to speed return of the case to the District Court to allow the District Court enough time to return me to teaching this semester.
-
Opinion
The Sixth Circuit reversed the District Court’s decision to abstain from hearing the case and remanded to the District Court to decide my motion to return to teaching during the pendency of the litigation. Here is a recording of oral argument in the case, which was held on July 28, 2026 (source).
-
Supplemental Memorandum in Support of a Temporary Injunction
I compare the University’s response to political pressure with Cambridge’s handling of a controversial appointment. I also show that the Van Tatenhove appointment violated three accreditation standards and the University’s own appointments regulation.
-
University’s Motion to Dismiss the State Dean Case
The University moved to dismiss the state dean case.
-
Superseding Motion to Consolidate Hearings
The University relied on the federal court’s opinion denying expedited discovery in my voluntarily dismissed federal case. I explain that the opinion addressed only my federal expressive-association claim, not my arbitrary-power, contract, and speech-chill claims under Kentucky law, and I respectfully set out why I believe its analysis of expressive association should not be followed.
-
Voluntary Dismissal
I dismissed the federal dean case without prejudice and refiled it in Kentucky state court.