Some are saying that because MIT and Whitehead were not held liable, they are exonerated from this mess. Nothing could be further from the truth. These institutions have sophisticated, eight-figure legal operations and substantial resources devoted to shielding them from liability. They know how to word damaging public statements while protecting themselves against defamation claims. They also know how to invoke attorney-client privilege, work-product protection, and other privileges to shield their dirty business from public scrutiny. Their ability to defend themselves legally should not be confused with institutional integrity. Faculty employment is generally at will. That means an employer can fire someone for any or no reason. Tenure is a policy, not a legal right. Faculty are sold the promise of its security, but finding out what protections they can actually enforce when push comes to shove can take years and enormous legal fees. Sally Kornbluth, now MIT’s president, even admitted in court once that tenure does not carry the legal protections faculty believe it does (Shaughnessy v. Duke, see her deposition excerpts in the summary judgment materials). Employment law provides no remedy for many destructive decisions universities make. Civil rights laws offer protection against discrimination, and pursuing those claims is often the only recourse faculty have in court against a university. But proving discrimination is difficult, especially for a scientist with a unique position and record. David pointed to Knouse as someone treated differently. She also ran a laboratory and had NIH funding, but I think the court ruled they were not similarly situated. He did have a more senior rank and a larger lab. So be it. But discrimination law only addresses discrimination. You can treat people like garbage and run your institution into the ground without committing actionable discrimination. This is where public accountability must come into play. The jury found that Knouse defamed David and unlawfully interfered with his livelihood. MIT, Whitehead, and HHMI held the authority, and through their actions, the false allegations against him became career-destroying consequences. That is why this verdict demands accountability from those institutions. They bear responsibility for the damage those actions caused.