Law Schools, Rape

Ken Starr's Embarrassing ESPN Interview -- How Can He Still Teach Law?

Does anyone think Ken Starr should still have a job?

By  
on

Ken Starr firedAfter his inevitable firing as president of Baylor University, he decided to go on ESPN for an interview because apparently he doesn’t understand how a self-serving videotaped testimonial creates even more problems.

At least Starr had the good sense not to respond a question about his awareness of a number of sexual assaults (both confirmed by a jury and allegedly) committed by Baylor football players by challenging what the definition of “is” is, a move that would melt the universe to the soundtrack of VH1’s “I Love the 90s,” but he didn’t acquit himself much better.

This is his actual explanation for not worrying much about the possibility of campus before the player convictions and associated outcry forced him to take notice: Baylor is a dry campus, so…

He also defended former coach Art Briles, calling him a “character shaper” and comparing him to Abraham Lincoln because — wha?

Is there some new corollary to Godwin’s Law I didn’t know about? Like, “the closer one moves to a public pillory over a horrific dereliction of duty, the probability of a comparison involving Abraham Lincoln approaches 1.” Another lesson Starr should have learned.

Sponsored

If you’ve not seen the interview by now, then by all means treat yourself. As lawyers it will feel like someone’s running rusty nails along a chalkboard while scratching a vinyl recording of The Chipmunk Song.

But while the sports media chatters about Starr’s efforts to implode on basic cable, the legally themed side conversation remains: How is he still teaching at the law school? Starr is the Louise L. Morrison Chair of Constitutional Law, which one would think means he teaches “Constitutional Law,” but Baylor alum tell us otherwise:

He doesn’t teach Con Law – at least he didn’t as of my graduation in 2014, and he’s not listed as teaching it on Baylor’s website. Prof. Guinn has taught Con Law there for years and probably will until he is physically unable to. Starr teaches a random con law elective, and I have no idea what the significance is of his “chair of constitutional law” position.

Frankly, this sounds a lot like the class he taught at my law school my 3L year. But is he really fit to be teaching any law school course right now?

Sponsored

The outrage is understandable. But it’s not like his constitutional law chops are really dulled by his apparent inability to perform the basic duties required of an academic executive. He did serve on the D.C. Circuit. It’s not as though Con Law, especially “a random con law elective,” raises these sorts of ethical quandaries. Though to the extent they might — say, a discussion on the due process concerns raised by the obligation placed on institutions to address Title IX — frankly his insight would be fascinating if only as a cautionary example.

But the real issue isn’t that he’s not qualified to teach at the law school or even that his actions disqualify him from teaching at the law school, it’s whether or not it’s in the long-term interests of Baylor Law to continue to work with a guy who did such tremendous harm to the university, who got publicly fired — based in part upon the recommendation of a respected law firm, and then voluntarily resigned another leadership position “as a matter of conscience.”

At a certain point, the law school needs to consider its own institutional reputation.

Ken Starr’s tone-deaf ESPN interview shows why Baylor needs to cut ties with him

Earlier: Ken Starr Fired — Can Still Teach ConLaw
Irony Alert: Ken Starr Should Lose His Job For Not Investigating Real Sex Crimes

Joe Patrice is an editor at Above the Law and co-host of Thinking Like A Lawyer. Feel free to email any tips, questions, or comments. Follow him on Twitter if you’re interested in law, politics, and a healthy dose of college sports news.

Topics

, , , , , , , , ,