I have been a professor at Harvard University for 34 years. In that time, the school has made some mistakes. But it has never so thoroughly embarrassed itself as it did this past weekend. At the center of the controversy is Ronald Sullivan, a law professor who ran afoul of student activists enraged that he was willing to represent Harvey Weinstein.
Mr. Sullivan is my friend and colleague. He is the director of the Criminal Justice Institute at Harvard Law School and the architect of a conviction-review program in Brooklyn that has freed a score of improperly convicted individuals. He is also a sought-after lawyer who has represented plaintiffs (including the family of Michael Brown, whose death at the hands of a police officer fueled the Black Lives Matter movement) as well as defendants (including Rose McGowan, the actress who faced drug charges and is, ironically, one of Mr. Weinstein’s accusers).
In addition to his work as a professor and a lawyer, Mr. Sullivan, with his wife, Stephanie Robinson, has served for a decade as the faculty dean of Winthrop House, an undergraduate dormitory where some 400 students live.
As a faculty dean, Mr. Sullivan is responsible for creating a safe, fun, supportive environment in which students can pursue their collegiate ambitions. Winthrop House is meant to be a home away from home; faculty deans are in loco parentis. Mr. Sullivan and Ms. Robinson are expected to attend to the students as counselors, cheerleaders, impresarios and guardians.
Enraged by Mr. Sullivan’s work on behalf of Mr. Weinstein, a cadre of students at Winthrop, and in other parts of the university as well, demanded the lawyer’s ouster, asserting that his choice of client undermined their confidence in his ability to be properly attuned to their thoughts and feelings. Some said that Mr. Sullivan’s choice was nothing less than “trauma-inducing.”
From the outset of the dispute, which began in January when Mr. Sullivan joined Mr. Weinstein’s team of lawyers (he has recently withdrawn from active participation), Harvard authorities have evinced sympathy with the position voiced by the student dissidents. “I take seriously the concerns that have been raised from members of the College community regarding the impact of Professor Sullivan’s choice to serve as counsel for Harvey Weinstein on the House community that he is responsible for leading as a faculty dean,” the dean of Harvard College, Rakesh Khurana, remarked in an email to students in February.
A few weeks later, after protests that included vandalism (spray-painted graffiti on university buildings included the slogans “Our rage is self-defense” and “Whose side are you on?”), Dean Khurana initiated a review of “the climate” at Winthrop House, including asking students in a questionnaire whether they found the dormitory “sexist” or “non-sexist.” Some onlookers saw the move as a predetermined predicate for wrangling Mr. Sullivan’s resignation or dismissal.
They were right. On Saturday, Dean Khurana announced that Mr. Sullivan and Ms. Robinson would no longer be deans of the college, citing their “ineffective” efforts to improve “the climate” at Winthrop.
Although Dean Khurana declared that his decision was “informed by a number of considerations,” he said nothing in his announcement about the issue that lay at the heart of the controversy: the claim that Mr. Sullivan’s representation of Mr. Weinstein was in and of itself inconsistent with his role as a faculty dean. No wonder the students who campaigned for his dismissal on that basis celebrated the administration’s action.
The upshot is that Harvard College appears to have ratified the proposition that it is inappropriate for a faculty dean to defend a person reviled by a substantial number of students — a position that would disqualify a long list of stalwart defenders of civil liberties and civil rights, including Charles Hamilton Houston and Thurgood Marshall.
Student opposition to Mr. Sullivan has hinged on the idea of safety — that they would not feel safe confiding in Mr. Sullivan about matters having to do with sexual harassment or assault given his willingness to serve as a lawyer for Mr. Weinstein. Let’s assume the good faith of such declarations (though some are likely mere parroting). Even still, they should not be accepted simply because they represent sincere beliefs or feelings.
Suppose atheist students claimed that they did not feel “safe” confiding in a faculty dean who was an outspoken Christian or if conservative students claimed that they did not feel “safe” confiding in a faculty dean who was a prominent leftist. One would hope that university officials would say more than that they “take seriously” the concerns raised and fears expressed. One would hope that they would say that Harvard University defends — broadly — the right of people to express themselves aesthetically, ideologically, intellectually and professionally. One would hope that they would say that the acceptability of a faculty dean must rest upon the way in which he meets his duties, not on his personal beliefs or professional associations. One would hope, in short, that Harvard would seek to educate its students and not simply defer to vague apprehensions or pander to the imperatives of misguided rage.
Now, of course, Harvard authorities are dredging up various supposed delinquencies on Mr. Sullivan’s part. An exposé in The Harvard Crimson refers to allegations that he and his wife were highhanded in their dealings with the staff at Winthrop House. No one is perfect; perhaps there is something to these claims.
But these dissatisfactions, if relevant at all, were not what provoked the student protests that led to Mr. Sullivan’s ouster. The central force animating the drama has been student anger at anyone daring to breach the wall of ostracism surrounding Mr. Weinstein, even for the limited purpose of extending him legal representation. They want to make him, a person still clothed with the presumption of innocence, more of an untouchable before trial than those who have been convicted of a crime. There was no publicized protest at Winthrop House when Mr. Sullivan successfully represented a convicted murderer, Aaron Hernandez, the former New England Patriots star, who was acquitted of a separate double murder before killing himself in prison.
Harvard officials are certainly capable of withstanding student pressure. This time, though, they don’t want to. Some high-ranking administrators have clearly been guided by an affinity for the belief that Mr. Sullivan’s representation of Mr. Weinstein constituted a betrayal of enlightened judgment. Others have simply been willing to be mau-maued.
In March, when it seemed that the administration was getting ready to do what it’s now done, 52 members of the Harvard Law School faculty, myself included, signed a letter supporting Mr. Sullivan’s “dedication to the professional tradition of providing representation to people accused to crimes and other misconduct, including those who are most reviled.” We called upon Harvard “to recognize that such legal advocacy in service of constitutional principles is not only fully consistent with Sullivan’s roles of law professor and dean of an undergraduate house, but also one of the many possible models that resident deans can provide in teaching, mentoring and advising students.”
The rejection of that advice has now led to an alarming impasse. Friends of academia should insist that Harvard answer the question: Why is serving as defense counsel for Harvey Weinstein inconsistent with serving as a faculty dean?
Randall Kennedy is a law professor at Harvard.
The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We’d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips. And here’s our email: email@example.com.Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook, Twitter (@NYTopinion) and Instagram.
神武四海升平特技“【说】【吧】！【你】【怎】【么】【会】【独】【自】【一】【人】【率】【先】【赶】【来】【寇】【岛】？”【谢】【云】【流】【终】【究】【是】【谢】【云】【流】，【将】【这】【些】【年】【积】【压】【的】【各】【种】【情】【绪】【通】【过】【那】【一】【掌】【宣】【泄】【出】【去】【后】，【他】【终】【于】【平】【静】【下】【来】。 【罗】【长】【风】【探】【手】【入】【怀】，【将】【那】【封】【书】【信】【掏】【了】【出】【来】，【递】【到】【谢】【云】【流】【面】【前】，【道】：“【师】【兄】【你】【先】【看】【看】【这】【封】【书】【信】【吧】！” 【谢】【云】【流】【接】【过】【书】【信】，【看】【完】【之】【后】，【却】【并】【未】【如】【罗】【长】【风】【想】【的】【那】【样】【暴】【怒】，【只】【是】【口】【中】
【第】【七】【天】【王】【万】【万】【没】【想】【到】，【叶】【文】【不】【仅】【没】【有】【死】，【还】【能】【满】【血】【复】【活】。 【而】【且】【从】【他】【背】【后】【发】【起】【致】【命】【的】【偷】【袭】。 【一】【个】【措】【手】【不】【及】，【结】【结】【实】【实】【的】【挨】【了】【叶】【文】【一】【套】【降】【魔】【钉】【珠】【神】【拳】。 【叶】【文】【火】【力】【全】【开】【之】【下】。 【数】【十】【枚】【砂】【锅】【般】【大】【小】【的】【青】【色】【佛】【珠】，【瞬】【间】【几】【乎】【全】【都】【轰】【在】【第】【七】【天】【王】【身】【上】。 【第】【七】【天】【王】【的】【翅】【膀】【登】【时】【断】【成】【了】【几】【十】【截】，【狮】【子】【般】【雄】【壮】【的】【巨】【头】【也】
【哪】【吒】【拍】【拍】【手】，【用】【混】【天】【绫】【把】【他】【们】【捆】【住】。【正】【要】【带】【回】【去】【之】【时】，【突】【然】【感】【觉】【到】【一】【阵】【压】【迫】【感】。 “【小】【娃】【娃】，【放】【了】【他】【们】，【本】【王】【饶】【你】【一】【命】！”【一】【个】【高】【达】【五】【米】【的】【巨】【人】【凭】【空】【出】【现】【在】【哪】【吒】【身】【后】。 【哪】【吒】【眯】【起】【眼】，【看】【着】【眼】【前】【的】【犬】【戎】【巨】【人】。【尊】【级】【强】【者】！ “【你】【就】【是】【犬】【戎】【王】？”【哪】【吒】【问】【道】。 【犬】【戎】【王】【淡】【淡】【的】【看】【了】【哪】【吒】【一】【眼】，【并】【没】【有】【回】【答】。【只】【是】【缓】
【本】【着】【以】【打】【探】【姬】【存】【希】【底】【细】【为】【目】【的】【的】【苏】【罪】，【阴】【差】【阳】【错】【的】【就】【知】【晓】【了】【这】【个】【足】【矣】【震】【惊】【整】【个】【魔】【武】【的】【大】【消】【息】。 【男】【人】【的】【声】【音】，【苏】【罪】【自】【然】【是】【听】【出】【来】【了】，【肯】【定】【是】【萧】【天】【这】【个】【小】【喽】【啰】【实】【锤】【了】。 【而】【那】【个】【女】【人】，【则】【是】【刚】【刚】【在】【操】【场】【上】【的】【讲】【台】【上】【解】【释】【历】【练】【过】【程】【的】【姬】【存】【希】！ 【同】【时】，【也】【是】【跟】【她】【苏】【罪】，【有】【着】【血】【海】【深】【仇】、【灭】【族】【大】【恨】【的】【主】【要】【凶】【手】【之】【一】！
【这】【个】【故】【事】【已】【经】【写】【了】【三】【个】【月】【了】。 【原】【本】【想】【象】【的】【很】【美】【好】【的】【一】【个】【故】【事】，【也】【一】【直】【认】【为】【会】【得】【到】【大】【家】【的】【喜】【欢】。 【但】【是】，【如】【今】【看】【来】，【一】【切】【事】【与】【愿】【违】。 【几】【乎】【从】【一】【开】【始】【就】【没】【有】【得】【到】【过】【多】【少】【机】【会】，【展】【示】【给】【大】【家】【看】。 【如】**【架】【至】【今】，【又】【是】【一】【两】【个】【月】【时】【间】【了】。 【每】【天】【都】【坚】【持】【更】【新】。 【每】【天】【为】【故】【事】【的】【情】【节】【绞】【尽】【脑】【汁】。 【却】【依】【然】【收】【效】神武四海升平特技“【嗖】，【嗖】，【嗖】” 【三】【头】【猛】【犬】【微】【伏】【身】【躯】，【下】【一】【秒】，【原】【地】【出】【现】【三】【个】【浅】【坑】，【三】【头】【猛】【犬】【的】【身】【躯】【化】【作】【三】【道】【残】【影】，【从】【不】【同】【的】【方】【向】【朝】【着】【布】【兰】【特】【冲】【了】【上】【去】。 “【找】【死】。” 【布】【兰】【特】【眼】【中】【闪】【过】【一】【丝】【狠】【厉】，【这】【种】【突】【然】【出】【现】【的】【怪】【物】【以】【前】【从】【来】【没】【有】【见】【过】，【就】【连】【自】【己】【面】【对】【都】【有】【些】【吃】【力】，【那】【么】【其】【他】【士】【兵】【就】【更】【不】【用】【说】【了】。 【身】【为】【优】【秀】【的】【将】【领】，【他】【有】
【欧】【彦】【哲】【心】【疼】【了】。 “【你】【要】【见】【她】，【我】【们】【明】【早】【便】【去】。” 【冬】【玙】【哭】【了】【半】【宿】，【第】【二】【天】【起】【床】【时】，【整】【双】【眼】【框】【都】【是】【红】【肿】【的】。【他】【心】【里】【生】【父】【亲】【的】【气】，【气】【父】【亲】【这】【样】【对】【母】【亲】，【便】【半】【宿】【都】【没】【跟】【欧】【彦】【哲】【说】【话】，【一】【直】【憋】【到】【进】【了】【蓝】【氏】【大】【庄】【园】。 【这】【是】【冬】【玙】【第】【一】【次】【来】，【他】【从】【不】【知】【道】【母】【亲】【住】【在】【这】【样】【一】【个】【温】【情】【而】【古】【意】【的】【地】【方】。 【他】【探】【身】【从】【车】【窗】【里】【打】【量】【着】，
【听】【完】【秦】【昭】【雪】【跟】amazing【的】【对】【话】，【显】【然】【所】【有】【人】【都】【愣】【了】。 【尤】【其】【是】【听】【到】【秦】【昭】【雪】【那】【圣】【洁】【的】【声】【线】，【不】【着】【不】【急】【的】【说】【话】【语】【气】，【更】【让】【人】【觉】【得】，【她】【心】【里】【面】【胸】【有】【成】【竹】。 【这】【一】【刻】，【世】【界】【都】【把】【目】【光】【聚】【焦】【于】【秦】【昭】【雪】。 【感】【觉】，【对】【秦】【昭】【雪】【的】【评】【价】【是】【时】【候】【要】【提】【升】【一】【下】【了】。 【在】【本】【次】【世】【界】【赛】【之】【前】，【鉴】【于】【北】【美】【中】【单】【的】【实】【力】，【所】【以】【在】【本】【次】【世】【界】