Law Schools

Amy Chua Denied Hosting Parties That Got Her In Trouble -- Contemporaneous Texts Disagree

Student accounts suggest she really had breached her agreement despite what she told Yale.

By  
on

The Yale Daily News broke the story that law professor Amy Chua would be stripped of her 1L mentoring group for violating the terms of a confidential agreement with the administration not to privately interact with students as a condition of her husband Jed Rubenfeld’s two-year suspension for sexual harassment. Chua quickly fired back denying the allegations, prompting alums to come forward pushing back against her defenses.

A new document circulating around Yale Law, available here, provides second-hand accounts of dinner events thrown by Chua in recent months, along with attached text messages from students claiming to be in attendance. This would seem to directly contradict the professor’s defense that she only met with students privately to counsel them “in times of crisis when they feel hopeless and alone,” and at the very least should invite a new round of inquiries from the administration.

Feb. 18:
I go over to John Doe’s to do my laundry. While at his apartment, I hear him call Jane Doe, who explains to him that Chua has just invited them over for dinner tomorrow. They discuss what to wear and what they should bring (ultimately deciding to bring a bottle of wine). John Doe makes zero mention of going over because of any personal crisis. After the phone call, he says that he’s been invited to a dinner party at Chua’s. John Doe implores me not to tell anybody so that Chua doesn’t get in trouble.

As the document continues, the author also describes learning of the dinners from an unrelated 1L, and provides screencaps of contemporaneous conversations with the Does describing the events. One welcome revelation from the letter is the claim that the suspended Rubenfeld was not allowed to have any contact with students during any of these events, which seems to match the spirit of the supposed restriction upon Chua, if blatantly ignoring the letter.

Some tipsters have suggested that “John Doe” in these exchanges is the same law student who made headlines for quitting the Yale Law Journal over diversity failings. Based on that claim, one tipster said of our supportive account of that incident, “probably not something you stand by when you read through this document.”

Except… these events seem entirely disconnected.

That is kind of the hitch with criticizing Chua as a mentor. By her own account, and even the accounts of some of the more critical alumni, Chua  offers a great deal of support for diverse clerkship applicants, priding herself for sort of leveling the playing field in the profession. Whether that’s out of a genuine concern for expanding diversity or out of a desire to cultivate more loyalty from students depending on her — or some combination of both — is beside the point: it’s a core facet of the promise she holds for students.

Sponsored

Calling out the Law Journal for its shortcomings in promoting diversity and gravitating toward a problematic working relationship with a professor claiming that she can sweep away obstacles in the path of diverse students seems fairly predictable actually. Institutional elitism aimed at snubbing women and minorities is not the same as forming an exclusive club around a figure claiming to advance students who may not benefit from traditional networks. Drawing parallels there reads a little like, “you say you’re against discriminatory hiring practices and yet you believe in affirmative action… curious.”

Which isn’t to say that it’s acceptable, only that it doesn’t invalidate completely independent opinions about the Law Journal.

The folks cited in this account seem to admit that they knew these events were not authorized by the administration and that they were aware that Chua would be in trouble if the events became public knowledge. To that extent, the students lied or at least actively misled people about what was going on. As one text included in the document says:

“I think it’s deliberately enabling the secret atmosphere of favoritism, misogyny, and sexual harassment that severely undermines the bravery of the victims of sexual abuse that came forward against Rubenfeld.”

That seems dead on correct. Sexual misconduct is exactly the sort of behavior that thrives when powerful people encourage cultures of secrecy. Even if one thought Chua and Rubenfeld were entirely innocent of the allegations raised in the past, at the point students are asked to keep secrets, it’s a sign something’s off. And it can be hard to stand up to the kind of pressure powerful people can array. It’s even harder when beyond the implied threat of crossing someone in asymmetric relationship, there’s also a degree of “soft power” in the form of a professor actively promising to “do right” by students.

Sponsored

But cultures of secrecy need to get blown up. If there’s nothing there, that’s for the administration to sort out, but it needs to know. Hopefully, the administration can get to the bottom of all this whichever way it turns out.

Earlier: Yale Law School Strips Amy Chua Of 1L Group For Repeated Violations
Amy Chua Defends Herself And Floodgates Open With Alums Calling BS
Yale Law Journal’s Diversity Problems… Just As Bad As The Last Time We Checked In

HeadshotJoe Patrice is a senior 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. Joe also serves as a Managing Director at RPN Executive Search.

Topics

, , ,