April 29, 2025
VENTURA, Calif. – Ten scientists are asking a California court to enforce a contractually obligated arbitration with Sage Publications after the academic publisher retracted three articles and removed one of the authors from the editorial board of an academic journal, then allegedly delayed an appeal process.
In 2019, 2021, and 2022, Sage published research from the scientists in its medical journal, Health Services Research and Managerial Epidemiology. Two articles explored dangers affiliated with abortion-inducing drugs, and one of those was later cited by a federal court in a ruling challenging the U.S. Food and Drug Administration for its removal of REMS (risk evaluation and mitigation strategies) surrounding the medication.
A South University professor subsequently filed a complaint that the researchers were affiliated with the Charlotte Lozier Institute, American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians and Gynecologists, and the Elliott Institute—all openly pro-life organizations. The researchers declared they had no conflicts of interest, and these affiliations were disclosed during the review process of the articles, which included a double-blind peer review where one reviewer was also affiliated with Charlotte Lozier Institute at the time.
Though all three articles were accepted for publication and, according to court documents, the medical journal's editor-in-chief praised at least two as a "fine contribution" to the journal, Sage later retracted the research, stating they were "misleading" and "demonstrate[d] a lack of scientific rigor" citing “fundamental problems with the study design and methodology,” as well as “unjustified or incorrect factual assumptions” found by two subject matter experts in an independent post-publication peer review.
“By retracting three studies by Charlotte Lozier Institute scholars without any legitimate objection to any of the findings, Sage put politics over publication ethics and blatantly disregarded the principles of open inquiry and commitment to science,” said Dr. James Studnicki, vice president and director of data analytics at Charlotte Lozier Institute, and one of the scientists who worked on the research. “The authors’ well-earned reputations as highly qualified scientists and researchers have been immeasurably harmed. We’re hopeful this opportunity to compel Sage to arbitrate in good faith will shed light on their meritless actions to silence our research.”
The scientists' petition, filed in early October, alleges "a strategy of delay.”
After the reader complaint, Sage issued a public "Expression of Concern" in July 2023. The authors responded to address Sage's concerns, but the October 2024 petition claims the publisher ignored their correspondence and issued a retraction notice on November 13, 2023. The authors had three days to respond, which they did after the deadline was extended to November 29.
Studnicki was removed from the editorial board of Health Services Research and Managerial Epidemiology (HSRME) in this interim, before the retraction was finalized on February 5, 2024. However, the petition alleges HSRME's Editor-in-Chief cited "the decision to retract [the Articles]" in Studnicki's termination.
The scientists claim, "to this day, Sage has never responded to the Authors' scientific rebuttal," which was allegedly ignored between its reception in November and the articles' retraction in February.
All 10 have sought arbitration as required by the Publishing Agreements entered into by Sage and the article authors but claim in their petition that "Sage has delayed arbitration for months on end" by placing extra-contractual conditions on the process and adding new conditions when the scientists sought to comply.
The scientists requested a submission to arbitration on February 6, 2024, the day after Sage retracted their research.
"Even more concerning," they note in court documents, "Sage has used its intransigence as a weapon to try to pressure the Authors into unilaterally surrendering their discover rights. Sage's egregious actions require this Court's intervention to compel arbitration."
Sage Publications has not yet responded in court.
Read the full petition in Studnicki v. Sage Publications here.
___
This story first appeared in Kentucky Today.
