There's A Lot More To This 'Dean Calling Out A Student For Sexism' Story
Sexism allegations are only one piece of the puzzle.
UPDATE (9/8/16 1:23 p.m.): Dean Rosenbury offered a quick response to this article, which I’ve added below.
Sometimes what seems like a straightforward story just opens up a whole can of worms.
When I wrote about Florida Dean Laura Rosenbury’s recent article that publicly identified a specific student who made a — by all accounts unintentionally — sexist remark about her during an event, I didn’t expect to uncover a pronounced atmosphere of distrust between the administration and the Florida Law Review and its alumni. The public chastening may have made recent waves, but months of battles over money and staffing decisions forged a complicated backdrop for this incident.
The Business Case For AI At Your Law Firm
There have been public records requests, people! That’s when you know you’ve got a spoiled relationship.
I didn’t understand how things could get so insanely messed up at a law school until I remembered that this law school is, in fact, BUILT ON AN ANCIENT INDIAN BURIAL GROUND.
First things first: my original story focused on how the social media firestorm over the dean’s decision to publicly identify the student (and the faculty advisor) obscured the fact that the dean was right about the sexist remark. While I didn’t think it was appropriate to identify who made the remark in a public setting — and it added nothing to her article — I argued that casting the student as the aggrieved party fed into narratives that downplay the seriousness of sexism. And all of this is true, especially as the story gets passed virally to those who aren’t in Florida following the story firsthand.
But tipsters with ties to Florida were quick to argue that the student and Law Review actually did display responsible ownership of the incident and took it as the teachable moment that it was. When I said in the original piece that:
Sponsored
Law Firms Now Have A Choice In Their Document Comparison Software
AI’s Impact On Law Firms Of Every Size
Generative AI In Legal Work — What’s Fact And What’s Fiction?
Law Firms Now Have A Choice In Their Document Comparison Software
They didn’t stop being good people just because of this episode — they only stop being good people if they refuse to reflect on this episode.
… well, the flip-side is true as well, and if they’ve taken the time to reflect and own up to it, then that actually makes them good people in this tale.
To that end, one tipster explained that the social media outrage that read as glossing over the problem to an outsider was actually focused on the sense among students that, given the students’ response and the passage of time (almost a year), this rebuke felt like an unwarranted retaliatory swipe. Fair enough. I did say this was an incident where both sides needed to own up to their mistakes and if only one side feels they have, then that frustration is understandable.
From the perspective of the tipsters, the story is that Dean Rosenbury arrived looking to cut back on law review funding and managed, over the objections of the staff and its faculty advisor, to scale back on some journal funds. Then, after the “vivacious” incident last autumn, many tipsters felt the pressure on Law Review stepped up.
Suspended Stipends
Sponsored
The Business Case For AI At Your Law Firm
How Transactional Lawyers Can Better Serve (And Maintain) Their Clients
According to alumni of the Florida Law Review, in an August letter seen by Above the Law, Dean Rosenbury unilaterally decided to suspend stipends provided to Florida Law Review editors — a policy dating back over 30 years — a matter of months after the incident. Dean Rosenbury contends that she only learned of the stipends in January and decided that best practices dictated that students should not receive pay and credit (which Florida provides for law review service) for the same work. The alumni counter that she cited ABA standards for this decision during “at least three separate alumni events this summer.” Those ABA standards, one assumes, refer to the controversial bar on externship pay. If those ever applied to this situation, they certainly wouldn’t now, given that the ABA struck down that ban at its annual meeting over the summer. The alumni also claim that she cited University policy for this decision, though a public records request for those policies was returned with:
The University has no responsive documents.
Certainly paying editors is a perk a lot of students around the country don’t have, but that’s what the alumni — at least those who graduated since the practice began in 80s — expected the students to get when they made donations. Did I mention that these stipends are paid out of an endowment? Because they are. So no school funds are lost paying for this practice.
On the one hand, it does seem to exacerbate the gap between haves and have-nots to allow some students to financially benefit from an older and more established endowment, while editors of other journals toil for free. That’s a real concern. On the other hand, if the goal, as Dean Rosenbury says in a letter written on Tuesday and attached on the next page, “is to have an outstanding Law Review,” it seems as though a modest financial incentive can’t hurt. It probably doesn’t add anything over the prestige of a law review editorial position, but it can’t hurt.
The money saved by cutting the stipends is now going to be used to “benefit the Law Review as a whole,” though apparently no one has as yet figured out exactly how that money can be used better than it already was.
Removing The Faculty Advisor
Professor Dennis Calfee served as the faculty advisor for the Florida Law Review for decades. He’s also the faculty advisor alluded to in Dean Rosenbury’s story as the source of the term “vivacious.” Not taking away from the fact that these linguistic choices were sexist and should be reflected upon, it does not seem like something he should be dismissed over. And yet, he was removed from his role as advisor after the incident. Per Dean Rosenbury’s letter, the decision is unrelated to the remark and instead part of an effort to bring new, rotating blood into the job. The alumni claim that the dean also previously cited ABA provisions for this decision, but has since backed off that justification. This is another instance where the move may have value — new blood can reinvigorate any institution — but coming right off of a this incident, and coupled with Professor Calfee also being functionally identified by the unnecessary public call-out, you can forgive students and alumni for feeling suspicious about the timing.
There’s also some bristling over the decision to merge the writing competition with other journals, which I’m sure rankles people in the thick of it, but seems positively mundane from outside.
In any event, this is a dispute steeped in optics. It’s not that Dean Rosenbury’s reforms are necessarily bad ideas, but when so many disputes have added up — all in the aftermath of the demeaning remark — that the alumni are writing letters and people are filing records requests, the already ill-advised move of publicly calling out the student for making a mistake appears to serve no purpose except poisoning the well further.
It’s unclear if the fences between the administration and Florida Law Review are going to mend, but owning up to the New England article as a mistake would be an act of good faith that may well help. Trust is built on small steps, after all.
UPDATE (9/8/16 1:23 p.m.): Dean Rosenbury reached out to note that the extent of alumni concern over policy changes at Florida Law Review only came to her attention after the article had gone to press so she didn’t expect the article to come out in such a contentious environment. She also stressed that she sees the virtue in working to get past this:
I certainly regret the distraction caused by my article. I am traveling at the moment, but when I return to UF I will speak with the parties directly to offer my apology. You are correct that this level of tension is unproductive, and I hope we will all work together to end it so we can focus on the very promising future of UF Law.
Earlier: Law School Dean Publicly Criticizes Student In Law Review Article Over A Sexist Remark
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.
