UC Irvine reverses field on Chemerinsky

LA Times Via Boortz ^ | Sept. 12, 2007 | Garrett Therolf and Henry Weinstein

[Michael.SF.]

The constitutional scholar says university officials told him the deal was off to head the new school because he was too ‘politically controversial.’

IRVINE, Calif. -- In a showdown over academic freedom, a prominent legal scholar said Wednesday that the University of California, Irvine's chancellor had succumbed to conservative political pressure in rescinding his contract to head the university's new law school, a charge the chancellor vehemently denied.

Erwin Chemerinsky, a well-known liberal expert on constitutional law, said he had signed a contract Sept. 4, only to be told Tuesday by Chancellor Michael V. Drake that he was voiding their deal because Chemerinsky was too liberal and the university had underestimated "conservatives out to get me."

Later Wednesday, however, Drake said there had been no outside pressure and that he had decided to reject Chemerinsky, now of Duke University and formerly of the University of Southern California, because he felt the law professor's commentaries were "polarizing" and would not serve the interests of California's first new public law school in 40 years.

News of Drake's decision quickly came made its way through academic and legal circles nationally where it came under criticism from liberals and conservatives scholars who said Chemerinsky was being unfairly penalized.

[Michael.SF.]

Looks like we won one in Orange County!

Love this part:

voiding their deal because Chemerinsky was too liberal and the university had underestimated "conservatives out to get me."

What goes around, comes around!

[GovernmentIsTheProblem]

“a well-known liberal expert on constitutional law”

Ahahahahah....

[pabianice]

[vbmoneyspender]

Hugh Hewitt is putting more effort into this to help Chemerinsky than he did to help Harriet Miers. I'll wager though that Hugh has never sat in on a class being taught by Chemerinsky. In my experience with Chemerinsky, when he is teaching he can't go five minutes without telling some lame joke at the expense of some Republican official. Specifically, when I watched his videotaped Bar course on Con Law in the early 1990s, every five minutes he was telling some snide joke about Reagan or Bush the elder. It was almost pathological. Maybe he has changed since then, but I doubt it.

I think the reason Chemerinsky acts this way is that he has never gotten over the fact that some years ago the Republicans put the kibosh on his attempt to become a federal judge. Hugh may not like it, but this is a smart play by UCI. I don't think Chemerinsky is capable of sublimating his left-wing agenda to the interests of UCI's law school.

[Michael.SF.]

I don't think Chemerinsky is capable of sublimating his left-wing agenda to the interests of UCI's law school.

The article tries to paint a picture of him being this very fair guy, who just happens to be liberal. I have never met a liberal who was interested in what is fair, if it means they have to yield ground.

Thanks for your insights into this man as it confirms that which was thought to be the case.

[SoCal Pubbie]

I wanted to call in and ask Hugh how many times has Chemerinsky come on his show and stated that some Republican appointee should not be confirmed because he or she held views that were “far out of the mainsteam”, irrespective of the candidate’s qualifications. I have no sympathy for Chemerinsky.

[vbmoneyspender]

How he taught stuck out like a sore thumb. I went to UC schools at both the undergraduate and law school levels and had plenty of left wing professors. But none of them were so overtly left-wing in class as Chemerinsky was. With him, it was non-stop political comments about Republicans like Reagan and Bush. To be fair, I’ll note again that that was about 15 years ago so maybe he has changed. But somehow I doubt it.

[Suzy Quzy]

Hugh has a SOFT heart for this COMMUNIST!!

[elizabetty]

Conservatives were the first and loudest to call BS on this firing.

[TheDon]

Chancellor Drake made a big mistake....which he was man enough to correct. I have no idea how he could have made such an obviously poor choice for the Dean position. Talk about starting the school off on the wrong foot!

[edcoil]

I have listened to Erwin Chemerinsky on the radio for years. He is so far left that anyone that is rational, mature, or reasonable simply cannot believe him. With all of academia filled with these folks, how UCI even put him on a short list amazes me.

Course, UCI gave millions in benefits and perks to staff and refuse to discuss it or be held accountable. It has become really corrupt. The sad part about those the expouse liberal/communist ideology is they actually would not have a job if they lived under that ideology.

Liberals and Communism doesn’t need lawyers and since he would not be one of the family, he would be a simple worker sweeping floors. They just don't get it.

[Michael.SF.]

Conservatives were the first and loudest to call BS on this firing.

So some conservatives were fair minded and supported him, while others felt his inability to leave politics out of the class room was inappropriate for a dean?

Is that correct?

Do you have a link that presents the case for conservatives to support Chemerinsky?

[Michael.SF.]

With all of academia filled with these folks, how UCI even put him on a short list amazes me.

Perhaps it is because "all of academia (is) filled with these folks".

;)

[vbmoneyspender]

Here is what the Dean of Boalt Hall said on the subject:

See Link

Drake drew support from Christopher Edley, dean of the Boalt Hall School of Law at UC Berkeley, whom Drake consulted on the decision to let Chemerinsky go.

"It appeared to me that Michael was willing to go forward in the face of opposition but for the fact that he lost confidence in Erwin's willingness to subordinate his autonomy and personal profile for the good of the institution," Edley said.

Edley, who worked in the Clinton administration, said it was nothing that he had not been called to do himself.

"I was questioned explicitly by people who feared I would turn the deanship into a platform for my own ideological commitments," he said. "But it was clear to me then, and it's clear to me now, that the job requires something else."

[tdewey10]

Heh. I remember that Bar course — BarBri — man it was annoying.

[vbmoneyspender]

Heh. I remember that Bar course — BarBri — man it was annoying.

I'd forgotten which course it was - but I didn't forget Erwin.

[elizabetty]

Do you have a link that presents the case for conservatives to support Chemerinsky?

The Conservative case is simple, the man's politics should have no bearing on his employment unless it will interfere with him carrying out his duties.

Check out Hugh Hewitt, he has a few posts and some links.

[John Jorsett]

Why’s California building another law school anyway? It’s not like we’re running short of attorneys.

[VOA]

Hugh has a SOFT heart for this COMMUNIST!!

Maybe he does.
But I suspect he'd like to have Erwin local for easy hook-ups
to get Erwin on the air.
And Hewitt knows KRLA listeners might scream at their radios
when Erwin is allowed to blabber on his show.

He also knows listeners keep tuning in and listening to that sort
of audio train-wreck.

I listened to Hewitt's show when I was in LA 1995-2005, even when
he was in the 6-9AM slot.
And I do recall a couple of times that even Hugh got heated when
disputating with Erwin.

Plus, maybe Hugh thinks any UC law school is a lost liberal swamp
and that having Erwin at UC Irvine won't have much impact...
and that Erwin leaving might improve Duke Law.
(That may be a long shot, because I have friends that graduated from
a Big 12 law school and said it was a pretty liberal place as well)

[Michael.SF.]

LOL. Good question!