Following this observation at Atrios, I am really very angry.
Erwin Chemerinsky, a distinguished constitutional scholar at Duke (formerly at USC), was slated to be the inaugural dean of the new UC (University of California) Irvine law school.
Until a few days later, after getting the offer and getting ready to come, Chancellor Michael Drake flew to Durham NC to tell Prof. Chemerinsky he was fired.
The reason?
Erwin Chemerinsky was told this week that the deal was off because he was too "politically controversial."
This is a sad day for the University of California. Would they have preferred
Ken Starr (dean at Pepperdine Law School)?
UPDATE: Another good diary posted as I was writing this.
For those of you unfamiliar with the concept, this is a gross violation of academic freedom.
Wikipedia has a rather good link about this.
The idea is that academics should be free to pursue their interests within ethical guidelines.
Academic freedom is why University of Colorado officials had to hunt for plagiarism charges to kick out Ward Churchill. The controversy around his views was insufficient grounds. The strongest means to enforce academic freedom is the tenure system (a successful scholar, judged on the merits of his/her research, is given `permanent employment' after a probationary period usually corresponding to assistant professor).
There is good reason for this. As the Wikipedia article notes, applying political standards to such positions leads to things like Lysenkoism. In the lamentable McCarthy era of our own history, such notables as the physicists David Bohm and Frank Oppenheimer, Robert's brother, were run out of American universities for communist party affiliations in their past. Bohm, by all counts one of the great minds of 20th century physics, had to dart around in the third world before finally settling in a good university position in London, this after being a prof at Berkeley and Princeton. I had an english professor as an undergrad who was run out of Harvard in the early 50s for similar reasons.
For years, UC had a residue of this unfortunate period in our history in the form of a loyalty oath to be signed by any hires-in 1950 a refusal to sign the oath led to the dismissal of 31 faculty. Although the oath was eventually repealed (1967!) and the dismissed faculty won a lawsuit for reinstatement, the stain on UC was large and lasting.
Flash forward to now.
Chemerinsky is a distinguished constitutional scholar and a go-to guy for the news media looking for progressive views on, e.g., what the Bush administration. For example, from his web site:
Author of four books: Federal Jurisdiction (Aspen Law & Business 5TH ED. 2007) (a one volume treatise on federal courts); Constitutional Law: Principles and Policies (Aspen Law & Business 3d ed. 2006) (a one volume treatise on constitutional law); Constitutional Law (Aspen Law & Business 2d ed. 2005) (a casebook); Interpreting the Constitution (Praeger 1987); Also, author of over 100 law review articles that have appeared in journals such as the Harvard Law Review, Michigan Law Review, Northwestern Law Review, University of Pennsylvania Law Review, Stanford Law Review and Yale Law Journal. Writes a regular column on the Supreme Court for California Lawyer, Los Angeles Daily Journal, and Trial Magazine, and is a frequent contributor to newspapers and other magazines. Regularly serves as a commentator on legal issues for national and local media.
In April 2005, was named by Legal Affairs as one of “the top 20 legal thinkers in America.” Named by the Daily Journal every year from 1998-2003 as one of the 100 most influential lawyers in California. Awards include the 2003 President’s Award from the Criminal Courts Bar Association; 2003 Freedom of Information Award form the Society for Professional Journalists; 2002 Community Service Award from the Western Center on Law and Poverty; 2001 Community Service Award from the Anti-Defamation League; 2001 Clarence Darrow Award from the People's College of Law; 2000 Alumni Achievement Award from Northwestern University; the 1999 Eason Monroe Courageous Advocate Award from the American Civil Liberties Union of Southern California; and the 1998 Judge John Brown Award for Contributions to Federal Judicial Education. Also received awards for work on the Los Angeles City Charter from the American Society of Public Administration, the Los Angeles Chamber of Commerce, and the Los Angeles Urban League.
So would Chancellor Drake have preferred Ken Starr? Glenn Reynolds? Eugene Volokh?
Now, in some fairness to the apparently weak spined Drake, the full oversight of the 10 campus UC system belongs to the Regents, who serve 12 year terms upon appointment by the Governor. The outgoing chair is Gerry Parsky, the incoming chair is one Richard Blum, aka, Mr. Dianne Feinstein.
And what about the regents? This is not the first time the regents have been caught up in political controversy. Ward Connerly, the great demolisher of affirmative action, was appointed by Pete Wilson in the 90s. Wilson also appointed Gerald Parsky, who was Bush's California campaign chair, is a prominent investment banker with an interest in large investment funds. And what a surprise-he was on the ill-starred Social Security panel appointed by Bush in 2001, and has been appointed to a board by Gov. Schwarzenegger to oversee the `reform' of CalPERS, the massive pension system in the country for California state employees. As a gift to UC faculty, he canned the marvelous civil servant manager of the UC Retirement System who had done such a spectacular job that for decades(!) faculty have not had to pay into the program. He replaced her with a combine of consulting firms which have been paid MILLIONS of dollars to underperform and which have led to proposals for LARGE contributions from faculty based upon crappy extrapolations by consulting firms. (Those familiar with the social security arguments can easily imagine the quality of the math.)
It has been one helluva long time since the regents directly interfered with individual faculty decisions (Connerly's dastardly deeds modified system wide policy, not the affairs of individuals). Indeed, the UC faculty are very powerful, if occasionally a little too caught up in the affairs of their ivory tower activities. For example, when it became widely known about the desire to demand faculty contributions to UCRS and the poor analysis going into this, a faculty pushback has led to a miraculous reexamination of UCRS performance that delays the necessity of contributions.
I hope a faculty pushback can spank Chancellor Drake and the regents. I would encourage any Anteater alums to let your views be know as well.
Update: As I was writing this and before I hit post, another diary which is excellent went up. As there is additional info here I am opting not to take it down.