The News-Gazette.com: Former UI law dean addresses admissions issue

Former UI law dean addresses admissions issue

By The News-Gazette

Tuesday, June 30, 2009 3:03 PM CDT

A letter from Heidi Hurd, former dean of the College of Law at the University of Illinois.

Dear Editor:

I write today because recently published articles threaten to tarnish the University of Illinois College of Law’s deserved stature in the eyes of the state’s citizens and within the larger academy, and they thus call for an immediate public response.

Contrary to recent headlines, the College of Law did not seek or receive any jobs from anyone in exchange for the admission of students. It did not enter into a “jobs-for-entry scheme” or engage in quid-pro-quo exchanges of admissions favors for employment favors. Indeed, it takes very little to make clear that the employment challenges of students who are not academically successful could never be overcome by anyone’s promises to furnish the College with job opportunities, as the recently published exchanges should have made clear. While my sarcasm was clearly lost on the tin ears of some reporters, my email exchanges in response to queries about this were on their face facetious.

In reply to a question about what jobs would count to meet the employment needs of students with poor academic predictors but powerful personal connections, I wrote: “Only very high paying jobs in law firms that are absolutely indifferent to whether the five have passed their law school classes or the Bar.” There are, of course, no law firms of this sort. Only students who pass law school classes can receive law degrees; only those with law degrees can take the Bar; and only those who pass the Bar are eligible to practice law. And when asked whether such students might find employment in government positions, I was being equally sarcastic when I replied: “I’m betting the Governorship will be open. One of them can have that job. Other jobs in Government are fine, since kids who don’t pass the Bar and can’t think are close enough for government work.” Inasmuch as I was a public servant at the time that I made these comments and have long been a scholar and teacher of political theory, my dismissive response was designed to convey the view that government, no less than private practice, requires the best and brightest.

I would never have thought that anyone could take these statements as straight-faced and derive from them the claim that the University of Illinois College of Law actually exchanged admissions for “patronage jobs”. And the emails between University leaders that referenced promises of employment for those predicted to be unemployable were never believed by anyone at the College of Law to be serious, they were surely never seriously intended by those who suggested them, and they were certainly never pursued by anyone at the College of Law. The only means of guaranteeing that a law school’s graduating students will find success within the legal profession is to cultivate in the very best and brightest the formidable skills that are required to manage the important affairs of others. And this is a goal that is simply inconsistent with non-meritocratic admissions decisions.

My comments, quoted in numerous published stories and columns for the exact opposite of their meaning, were designed to highlight the fact that efforts to elevate less qualified applicants over more qualified applicants compromise the values of equality and excellence that ought to be the pole stars of all those entrusted with the integrity of the academy. I trust that the Admissions Review Commission will navigate by these stars, and I look forward to the benefits of its work.

Sincerely,

Heidi M. Hurd

David C. Baum Professor of Law and Philosophy

Dean of the College of Law 2002-07

University of Illinois Champaign-Urbana

Comments

I suppose if you are a lawyer you make the best defense you can, but this defense is absolutely ridiculous. Dean Hurd would have us believe this email correspondence, over several years, means the opposite of what it plainly says simply because if taken at face value it is too incriminating. There also is the problem that there are replies from others, such as the Chancellor, who do not seem to be in on the joke, and in fact (as can be seen from the emails printed in the Tribune) are transmitting a serious offer of 5 jobs in exchange for a law school admission. My guess is that not one person in 100 would interpret Dean Hurd's messages as unserious or facetious.

Posted by bassetsdad on June 30, 2009 at 10:29 PM Suggest Removal

Yeah sure, you can tell she's a lawyer. The U of I law school can say bye-bye to their top 25 ranking for the foreseeable future. I'm so glad I no longer work there, it's such an embarrassment having it on my resume, but not much I can do about it now.

Posted by moderndaycowboy on June 30, 2009 at 10:43 PM Suggest Removal