Advertisement

News, Views and Careers for All of Higher Education

Thank You for Not Smoking

A sign outside George Washington’s law school

Related stories

Given how freely and frequently John F. Banzhaf III files lawsuits — one of the courses he teaches at George Washington University’s law school is nicknamed “suing for credit” — it’s almost remarkable that it took him this long to take direct aim at his employer. But Banzhaf, a professor of public interest law at George Washington for more than 30 years and a crusader against smoking and unhealthy fast food around the world, has turned his anti-smoking campaign on his own institution. And he’s doing so in a way that would hold an individual administrator at GW personally liable, which he asserts could break new legal ground.

Banzhaf says that university administrators have repeatedly declined in recent months to respond to requests by students and others to restrict smoking near the entrances to buildings on the campus. A “gauntlet of tobacco smoke” surrounds many an entrance to campus buildings, Banzhaf says — except those, like the entrances to the law school and the building that houses the university’s president and other top administrators, that already display signs barring smoking near the entrances, Banzhaf notes with some irony.

More than 500 students and staff members signed an online petition this winter that urged the university to amend its policies by prohibiting smoking within 50 feet of the entrances to all buildings, but the university’s Office of Risk Management, which oversees such policies, has refused to act, Banzhaf asserts. Matt Lindsay, assistant director of media relations at the university, says that the institution does not control the sidewalks outside the entrances to its buildings, and that GW officials don’t think it would make sense to put up signs discouraging an activity when “it is not something we can back up and actually stop people from doing.”

So last week, the law professor delivered a letter to Fitzroy Smith, who directs the risk management office, about Banzhaf’s intention to file a discrimination complaint with the District of Columbia Office of Human Rights if Smith and the university do not take steps to stop smoking around the entrances to buildings on the campus. “This will seek to hold him personally and individually liable for discrimination against nonsmokers and persons with handicaps” related to smoking, such as respiratory illnesses, Banzhaf says.

Banzhaf says that the legal action would take advantage of a provision in the D.C. Human Rights Act that allows complainants to target individuals who “aid and abet” discrimination that is committed by their institutions. “Previously where students or faculty felt that they were victims of some kind of discrimination — race, national origin, sex — it seemed that their choices were either to file a complaint with the university, which didn’t get them very much, or they could go to court and file a suit against the university,” he says.

“This would create a precedent whereby any student or faculty member could proceed not against a university, which is well protected, but against the particular individual who is specifically responsible for the action, and seek possible damages and attorney’s fees.” Several cases, including one Banzhaf initiated to stop editors at a community newspaper in Washington from running “ladies nights” ads, which he contended discriminated against men, have successfully cited this provision, he says. Banzhaf says he believes, from early research, that such an approach is possible under federal civil rights laws, and that it could be applied to administrators at colleges nationally as well.

At least one higher education legal expert, Sheldon E. Steinbach, vice president and general counsel of the American Council on Education, said he thought Banzhaf’s idea was a long shot. It is “extraordinarily rare” for an individual to be held accountable for the actions of an institution, Steinbach said, describing Banzhaf’s legal theory “far-fetched in the extreme.”

Smith has declined to comment on the case. Lindsay, the GW spokesman, said that the university “welcomed the feedback” from students and from Banzhaf, and that it was considering two steps to respond to their complaints. First, they have encouraged the associations that manage each campus residence hall to take a vote of the students who live there about whether they want to “self-police this kind of thing” by barring smoking around that dormitory.

University officials are also “taking a look at the location of ashtrays” near campus buildings, with the idea that moving the ashtrays further away from the entrances might “push folks away” from the doors.

The university hopes that Banzhaf stops short of actually filing the legal complaint against Smith, Lindsay says, but if he pursues it, “we will support” Smith.

Banzhaf says he doesn’t have any great desire to sue his employer or any of its officials, and notes that in more than 30 years at the university, he has been able to resolve his past conflicts with the institution “by working through the procedures. It’s only when you run into a brick wall, and people basically say ‘No, the hell with you,’ that you have to do something different.”

“My aim,” he says, “is to get them to do what they should do, which is to protect people from dangerous smoke. If the only way to do that is to establish a precedent so that every student who feels that he or she has been discriminated against in any way can easily file a complaint not against the university, but against an individual who can be held personally and individually liable, I will do so.”

Colleges, he adds, often “have done the right thing only after legal action was brought or threatened.”

Doug Lederman

Got something to say?


Want it on paper? Print this page.
Know someone who’d be interested? Forward this story.
Want to stay informed? Sign up for free daily news e-mail.

Advertisement

Comments

Slouching toward Franco-America

My father smoked heavily (cigars) and died from cancer. I went to college on Tobacco Road and have friends who (were) tobacco farmers. News-flash: smoking can cause death, and is annoying and costly.

Yet, every day, you see ill-mannered smokers, huddled near doorways, sometimes shouting into cell-phones (Asian students are particularly good at this). They dump cigarette butts on the ground, increasing maintenance costs. Their habit drives up overall health care costs.

They could really care less about anyone else — hey, this is America, home of neo-Nazi rallies in Skokie! Better than Singapore, where you could get caned for behaving like this!

Yes, there are not enough cops to enforce the 25-foot limit, much less 50-foot. Video cameras? Oh, we’d have to check with the ACLU about that. That would take effort.

If smokers want to kill themselves, that’s up to them. Just don’t involve innocent bystanders, people who just trying to get to work without getting the social equivalent of farting in public. You’re welcome.

B.J., at 6:00 am EDT on April 14, 2006

Mr. Banzhaf sounds like the type of lawyer responsible for all the lawyer jokes out there. Anyone who has as a goal to file a law suite as part of their class structure seems a bit over the top. Superfluous law suites do nothing but clog the courts and raise the cost of existing in our society. I wouldn’t be surprised if the lawyers who sued McDonald’s over a hot cup of coffee had taken one of Mr. Banzhaf’s class’s.

robert beauvais, at 10:25 am EDT on April 14, 2006

smoking lawsuit

Smokers have every right to smell disgusting and to ruin their lungs, skin, hair, teeth, clothing, furniture, etc. It truly is their right to ruin their health and to make themselves sexually unattractive. But as to whether they should be allowed to force others to suffer the negative repercussions of their choice to inhale poisonous fumes, well, they shouldn’t be allowed. There is no question that secondhand smoke kills. Why in the hell should smokers at George Washington, or anyhwhere else be allowed to force their dangerous habit on other people? I can’t even believe this is still a topic of debate.

The University is clearly at fault for not keeping its students safe by enforcing (at a minimum) the 50 foot policy. If it takes a lawsuit for GW to simply do what is reasonable—that is, to not allow smokers to kill non-smokers—then so be it.

For folks who want to smoke outside smoke-free buildings and in other places where I want to breathe clean air, I have a suggestion: Don’t exhale.

Lisa Kramer, Project Director at Federal Government, at 12:50 pm EDT on April 14, 2006

Smokers

There are really only two kinds of people in the world — those who want to control what others do and those who do not. I find the former to be much more disgusting than smokers and, in the long run, much more dangerous.

sillyone, at 4:15 pm EDT on April 14, 2006

Controllers

Sillyone, your name says it all.

You might also try “Shallow Reasoning” as a moniker?

By blowing smoke into the air in a crowded area, and flicking cigarette butts onto the ground, and driving up the rates of health care costs, don’t smokers “control” the behavior of others?

As one who’s lived with smokers for 33% of my life, I’m happy that your generation will inherit the costs for increasing illnesses caused by second hand smoke.

By the way, I’ve read that most of the wildfires throughout the Great Plains (Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas, Colorado) were believed to have been started by carelessly discarded cigarettes. Talk about controlling behavior of others.

Dr. F. Gump, at 7:45 am EDT on April 15, 2006

Smokers are being persecuted

Ok, first we smokers cannot smoke in buildings, then we are taxed ridiculous amounts for our habits, then we get persecuted by the followers of big brother. When are we finally going to demand that we be treated as human beings? What is next concentration camps for smokers?

Arthur Lee, at 12:05 pm EDT on April 16, 2006

Add more meat to the lawsuit

Hey, I am all for this “wake up and smell the butt” lawsuit. Frankly, I am sick of smoke in front of our doors, smoke coming in through our classroom windows and stinking students (many of whom at the age of just 18 have a highly-developed smoker’s cough) whose smoke-soaked hair and clothing create such a stench in my office area that I have to keep myself armed with Febreeze to eliminate the substance. Some countries have laws against eating and smoking in cars (hello, cell phone abusing, smoking, junk food eat-at-the-same-time American drivers!) One writer above is correct about the wildfires — the NUMBER 1 cause being flicked-out cigarette butts. One such fire almost cost my parents and my brother their houses recently. I would be thrilled to see those who smoke, those who ride motocycles without helmets and those who overeat to have to pay even more in premiums until their vile and inconsiderate behavior stopped cold. Cold Turkey, that is! And that’s what it takes. Hurray for the non-smokers who are sick of being taken advantage of by those who have little to no regard for the health and pocketbooks of others. Wanna smoke? Then pay the piper.Hana

Hana Myerova, Associate Professor, at 12:10 pm EDT on April 16, 2006

I say, Three cheers for Banzhaf. I have to hold my breath when I enter the building where I teach to avoid breathing the smoke from the smokers who are inevitably clustered in front of the doors. And this supposedly smoke-free bulding houses faculty who still light up with impunity in “their” offices. Complaints produce no change. So if it takes a lawsuit to change behavior in public places, so be it.

Some professor, at 6:30 pm EDT on April 16, 2006

Ex-Smokers

My feeling for many years now is that former smokers are leading the drive against smoking anywhere. It is very difficult to quit and I think ex-smokers do not want to be reminded of the temptation. I am a smoker and I know my smoke is offensive to non-smokers and I try to be courteous in my choice of places to smoke. My question is the same as some the others that have responded. Where does this all stop and who decides what is good for us? Are we to close the fast food eateries and ban cell phone use?

And I am very tired of hearing of the second hand smoke studies that found what they wanted to find. When you are funded by organizations that want to find another way to ban smoking you will find what they want you to find. I am also disturbed that if a person ever smoked in their life, then that is quickly blamed for their illness or death. Is there a remote possiblity it was something else the medical community should be aware of? I am hearing that obesity is next on the list. We should all buy Jenny Craig and Weight-Watchers stock now!

Ken, at 11:15 am EDT on April 18, 2006

Public Liability for allowing smoking

I personally would love to see this person file a suit and get this topic into a court of law. Anti-smoking studies had yet to win a court case based on fabricated studies. This or any suit might actually bring to light the loony science used to publish these contrived studies.

Bruce Fox, at 10:15 am EDT on May 15, 2006

please stop whining

Gee, those who don’t like smoke have to walk by those who do for all of—what? three seconds? Poor babies, I’ll bet that just takes years off your pathetic little lives, doesn’t it? If you don’t like smokers by the door, join witht hem to push for a smoking room, that way they don’t have to stand outside like lepers in the elements and you don’t have to (God forbid!) smell tobacco smoke.

chris, at 1:45 pm EDT on May 15, 2006

smoking

To Dr. Gump,I live in Texas and experienced the fires first hand. Most were started by lightening and one fire near DFW airport was started from a car accident. No one threw a cigarette out of their car window as you would like people to believe and had they, it would have extinguished immediately as there was torrential downpours at the time. Get it right or keep it to yourself or find another argument. I also know several firemen who has told me that cigarettes are also to blame for housefires but that is only after an ashtray is found. To make a job easier, that is the first to blame yet it could quite possibly be the wiring in the house.

Now, could anyone tell me how all you antismokers are still alive? I am betting you have been exposed to enough smoke by now that by your own claims should have killed you years ago.

Diane Wrobel, Mrs., at 4:40 pm EDT on May 16, 2006

Advertisement

 Jobs Related to Thank You for Not Smoking

or search for jobs directly.

Adjunct Instructor, Spanish
Lone Star College System

Located just north of Houston, Texas, our five campuses serve 1,400 square miles. Our student enrollment is nearly 50,000 in ... see job

Professor & Director
University of Minnesota, Twin Cities

The University of Minnesota is a premier employer and a talent magnet attracting leading faculty and staff from around the ... see job

Physiology
Lebanese American University

School of Medicine Discipline(s): Physiology see job

Open Rank Faculty
University of Colorado at Denver and Health Sciences Center-Anschutz Medical Campus in Aurora

Posting Description: The School of Public Affairs (SPA) at the University of Colorado Denver seeks ... see job

Tenure Track Faculty Opening — Social Psychologist
California University of Pennsylvania

Located on the Appalachian Plateau, an area of rolling hills, California University of Pennsylvania is a short drive from ... see job

Assistant Professor of Jewish Literature
University of Colorado

Posting Description: The Department of Germanic and Slavic Languages and Literatures and the Program in ... see job

Postdoctoral Research Associate (112199)
Northeastern University

Northeastern University, founded in 1898 and located in Boston, is a private research university that is a leader in ... see job

Major Gift Officer
University of Minnesota, Twin Cities

The University of Minnesota is a premier employer and a talent magnet attracting leading faculty and staff from around the ... see job

GIS/Systems Integration Analyst
University of Idaho

Provide GIS, computer, and IT support to Gap Analysis Program (GAP) office as well as partners and cooperators in order to ... see job

Director of Institutional Research
National-Louis University

Today, NLU serves more than 12,000 students from five Chicago area campuses, in addition to campuses in three states and ... see job