Last year, former St. Louis Public Radio General Manager Tim Eby filed a lawsuit against the University of Missouri Board of Curators, which operates the station, for defamation. Now the NPR affiliate’s legal defense says it has “sovereign immunity” from the litigation.
Removed from his position in September 2020 after 11 years amid claims of perpetuating “structural racism,” Eby is seeking more than $100,000 in damages. Despite the controversy, he received a six-month pay extension and a consultancy role post-dismissal. Eby now contends that the allegations have severely impacted his professional opportunities.
In a post on Medium, station journalists said Eby chose to maintain “white supremacy at the station by remaining complacent with the status quo.”
Represented by Christian G. Montry, Eby argues that financial constraints during the COVID-19 pandemic limited his ability to meet staff demands for changes, which he considered financially unfeasible or legally contentious.
Now, during a court hearing on April 18, the Riverfront Times reports the university’s defense, led by attorney Joseph Martineau, argued that the station is immune from such lawsuits due to sovereign immunity, which protects state entities from most civil litigation. Since the state of Missouri owns the University of Missouri and the University owns St. Louis Public Radio, they are saying the case should be dismissed.
The implications of this defense raise concerns about the accountability of media organizations that are part of public institutions. Sovereign immunity, similar in protection to qualified immunity for police officers, could potentially shield the station from consequences of defamation, leading to ethical implications. These legal proceedings could set a precedent for how public media entities are treated under defamation law.
The case is currently under review by St. Louis Circuit Court Judge Joseph Patrick Whyte, with the station’s motion to dismiss based on sovereign immunity still pending.
I am not a lawyer, the radio station’s position doesn’t make sense to me, and I think will fail. A radio station that hires employees cannot abuse those employees and not be liable for damages if a suit is brought and is found to have merit. Notice that the station does not deny defaming Eby, but only states they can’t be sued. Eby should have sued for $1 million; the fact that he didn’t shows his true loyalty to public broadcasting, ironically the entity that defamed him. I’d really like to know more about the personnel who were accusing him of fostering systemic racism because I suspect there was reverse racism afoot.