Do you know anyone who never passes up the opportunity to make the wrong choice, or is amazing in their inability to “get it right?”  That seems to be institutionalized at the University of California, Irvine.  From the selection of a mascot (an anteater) to putting sick people on organ transplant lists but never actually doing transplants to trying to open a law school.

 

It may be surprising to some of you that I tend to spin the dial on my short commutes to and from the Front Porch to the office listening to talk radio.  One of my stops in the evening is Hugh Hewitt on KRLA.  He has a sense of humor I appreciate and is dedicated to his conservatism—sometimes too much so, but one always knows where he stands.  One recurring segment he has on his show is “The Smart Guys”, who consist of Long Beach resident (I am fairly certain) John Eastman and Dean of the Chapman University Law School, and Erwin Chemerinsky, Professor at Duke University Law School.  Hewitt calls them “the smart guys” because they are, they are two of the top Constitutional Law minds in the country, authors of texts, they have argued and filed briefs for the Supreme Court, and they disagree on almost every case brought before the Supreme Court.  Which is why Hewitt has them on together; so the listeners can get the conservative and liberal interpretations of the Constitution on landmark cases.

 

Listening to interchanges between Eastman and Chemerinsky is educational and fun as they each bring up cases and their interpretation of the Constitution and apply it to specific arguments before the Court.  Eastman is the more strict in interpreting the Constitution, i.e. conservative; and Chemerinsky’s interpretations are more liberal in finding meaning from the document.  Because of the overt conservatism present by the host and the majority, overwhelmingly so, of his callers Chemerinsky is the lone voice of opposition to what is being heard.  He is considered one of, if not the, top Constitutional Law professor in the country.

 

Not long ago Michael Drake, the Chancellor of UCI, after what one presumes to be a thorough search and interview process involving many individuals, signed a contract with Chemerinsky making him the first Dean of the UCI Law School.  Great move right?  Start your new school off with a leader who is one of the top minds in the business, this should assist in recruiting top professors from other law schools and attract top caliber students. 

 

Not so fast.  It seems some of the more conservative donors to UCI were not pleased with Chemerinsky’s politics, his editorials lambasting some Supreme Court decisions that came down on the right side of the political spectrum and were not interested in donating to a school run by a blatant liberal.  Drake showing that to be a University of California Chancellor requires not having principals, strength and courage to stand up for your decisions or the ability to apply adequate vision to decision making, caved into the complaints and Tuesday (9/11/07) fired Chemerinsky as Dean before he even drew a paycheck.

 

Drake’s reason appears to be, “I felt we would not be able to work together effectively” or something to that effect.  Should he not have known that through what I have to presume was a very thorough process of interviews and background checks?  After a very public and national hiring he comes to this conclusion?  As I said in the title, spot the idiot—oh and he is on the public payroll by the way.

 

As someone who has complained and railed against the incredible liberal and far left bias of college and university (heck elementary and high school) faculty and administration rosters, one would think that I would be celebratory that a new law school right down the road from the Front Porch would get not start off by hiring a liberal to head the school.  That would be incorrect.  I am appalled that UCI and Drake went all the way to actually signing a contract with Chemerinsky before firing him because of his political beliefs.  While I want more representation of diverse opinions and thoughts on campuses beyond those of the liberal elite, I do not feel that it should come by simply firing people for their beliefs. 

 

What Drake’s idiotic move has done is open the door for other campuses across the country to now get rid of their professors who do not “conform” to the group think at their college or university—i.e. pink slip professors and administrators who may be conservative, or even not far left.  I have often argued against the strict tenure aspect of professors who are essentially given a green light to do what they please without recourse of losing their positions.  I understand the security tenure gives professors for freedom of thought and expression, I think too many use it for freedom of laziness or expressing of truly vulgar ideas and lessons to impressionable young minds.  The UCI canning of Chemerinsky before he even came to California however further entrenches the ideal and practice of strict and inviolate tenure.

 

Were I a UCI graduate, regardless of my party affiliation, my political ideology or belief system, I would be embarrassed and disgusted with the actions of the Chancellor. As a tax payer in California I see his continued employment as a waste of my taxes and adds to the stereotype of over-promoted public employee.

 

I hope the UC Regents do the right thing and re-instate Chemerinsky’s contract and do all they can to convince him to move to Orange County and build the best law school he can.

 

Your thoughts welcome, click here.