From time to time, law schools simply have to deal with the repercussions of faculty saying offensive things in class. In a world filled with biases — implicit and pretty darn obvious — that is just something that will happen sometimes, as it will in any institution where human beings are its greatest resource. But what law schools absolutely can control (and prepare for) is their reaction when everything goes pear shaped.
The University of Chicago knew — for years — that law professor Geoffrey Stone used the N-word in class as part of his lesson on fighting words. As we reported in our first story on this issue, as early as 2013 Stone’s teaching evaluations had complaints about the practice. But they have steadfastly refused to condemn the practice.
Despite not responding to Above the Law’s request for comment, the University has gone on the record with their position. The school made a statement to conservative outlet The College Fix, the kind of publication that will parrot the company line about the importance of the First Amendment without a critical look at how students are being impacted. In the statement Jeremy Manier, assistant vice president of communications, hid behind broad concepts of academic freedom:
“Faculty members have broad freedom in the choice of ideas to discuss in the classroom and in their expression of those ideas, and students are free to express their views on those subjects,” he said via email.
“The University of Chicago is deeply committed to the values of academic freedom and the free expression of ideas, and to fostering a diverse and inclusive climate on campus. We believe universities have an important role as places where controversial ideas can be proposed, tested, and debated by faculty and students,” Manier said.
Notice how the University’s statement doesn’t mention the harm the N-word does. Even Professor Stone eventually came around and promised to take the N-word out of future lesson plans, but still the school doesn’t see fit to condemn the use of an unquestionably vile word. And black students at the law school have had enough.
In an open letter to Dean Thomas Miles, the University of Chicago Black Law Students Association has explained in clear terms what the school’s policy does to them:
Cloaked in First Amendment rhetoric, the University of Chicago has prided itself on being one of the few, if not the only, law schools that permit professors to include racial slurs as part of their curriculum. We understand the contours of Freedom of Speech and the value it can add to the marketplace of ideas. However, free speech is not free, and as it is currently applied, the University’s free speech policy, the “Chicago Principles,” leaves Black students bearing the costs. In addition to being students, we educate faculty, advise administration, and spearhead diversity initiatives. Others disengage due to feelings of isolation. We attend a school that professes to support a free exchange of ideas yet suppresses speech that challenges white supremacist thought through its hiring practices, recruitment efforts, and lackluster pedagogical approaches when addressing contentious topics. We did not pay thousands of dollars to attend an institution that takes a passive role in responding to structural injustices at the expense of our educational liberties.
Skills That Set Firms Apart
Legal expertise alone isn’t enough. Today’s most successful firms invest in developing the skills that drive collaboration, leadership, and business growth. Our on-demand, customizable training modules deliver practical, high-impact learning for attorneys and staff—when and where they need it.
How great to finally see the law school confronted with the human cost of their so-called neutral policies. BLSA also informed the dean they were withdrawing from participation in Admitted Students Day:
From April 4-6, BLSA will engage with admits of color on our own terms. We also withdraw our consent to the Law School for the use of our personal and collective images for recruitment purposes indeterminately.
This isn’t the first time Dean Miles has been called upon to do… anything to support students of color at the law school. Last year there was controversy surrounding flyers for an Edmund Burke Society event that spewed derogatory rhetoric on immigrants. In response, the Law Student Association President eviscerated the administration for its repeated failures to promote an “environment of inclusion.” Dean Miles’s response was to rebuke not those spreading hateful rhetoric, but the Law Student Association for their attempts to rein in those mocking immigrants.
It’s clear the University of Chicago has made a decision to embrace its historic conservative roots. That Barack Obama once taught there is merely a red herring. The school protects the shock-jock technique of using the N-word in class over the real negative impact of deliberately creating a hostile environment for black students in the class to teach… something that could be taught just as well by saying “suppose then the guy in the hypo uses racial epithets.” The school hides behind the First Amendment, but it is possible to support academic freedom and the ability to discuss sensitive subjects and do more than merely shrug your shoulders when a teacher uses the N-word. Given this backdrop it shouldn’t be a surprise that BLSA students are no longer willing to be props for the administration.
[pdfjs-viewer url=”https://abovethelaw.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/4/2019/03/ucblsa-asw-petition_true.pdf”]
Kathryn Rubino is a Senior Editor at Above the Law, and host of The Jabot podcast. AtL tipsters are the best, so please connect with her. Feel free to email her with any tips, questions, or comments and follow her on Twitter (@Kathryn1).