Racial Incidents Lead to Changes at Law School

By Nalina Sombuntham

CRIMSON STAFF WRITER

A string of racially-charged incidents at Harvard Law School (HLS) this spring resulted in a broad swath of administrative policies intended to promote racial sensitivity on the campus—where some students say exists a “systematic problem of racial and ethnic harassment.”

The initiatives included a training program for incoming students and faculty on “negotiating difficult conversations in a multi-cultural environment” and the establishment of a faculty-student committee charged with analyzing and debating suggested student reforms, such as the development of a racial harassment policy and the creation of an office of multicultural affairs.

In addition, some of the Law School’s annual summer faculty workshops will be devoted to discussing how to effectively deal with similar incidents in the future.

Dean of the J.D. Program Todd Rakoff ’67 said in late April that these steps would “create a better climate—an environment of genuine mutual respect and improved behavior patterns.”

Heated Language

The controversy that garnered nationwide attention began when first-year law student Kiwi A. Camara used the racial epithet “nig” in a post on a website run by HLS students.

On April 1, first-year law student Matthias Scholl sent an anonymous e-mail to classmate F. Michelle Simpson, who had filed a complaint with the school about Camara’s use of the slur on the website, and to classmate Olufunke G. Bankole.

Scholl’s classmates tracked the e-mail to Scholl after conducting an on-line search.

In the e-mail, which the self-described civil libertarian Scholl said was only intended to defend the right to free expression, Scholl wrote: “I have actually begun using the ‘nigger’ word more often than before the incident.”

Tensions erupted the next day when 80 first-year students—a “section” that takes introductory classes together—discovered fliers bearing swastikas, profanities and other anti-Semitic statements in their mailboxes. The fliers also contained reprints of the then-anonymous e-mail sent to Simpson and Bankole.

After classmates identified Scholl as the author of the e-mail, on April 4 Weld Professor of Law Charles R. Nesson ’60 accompanied him into Visiting Professor of Law Bernard E. Harcourt’s criminal law class so Scholl could apologize to his classmates.

Though he apologized, Scholl later defended his e-mail as an exercise of his first amendment rights. Scholl, who is from Poland, said that the offensive nature of his e-mail may be attributable to language differences.

“I would use the word to show people I have the right to use it, but I don’t condone it,” Scholl said at the time. “I’m not a racist. My wife is Asian, my best friend is from India and I share an office with an African-American whose friendship, knowledge and resources I value.”

Simpson said that she immediately responded to his in-class apology.

“I got very emotional and directed my comment to the class, saying that if you’re going to say something hateful and going to apologize for it later then don’t say it all,” she said in April.

Immediately after the apology, Nesson proposed to the class that the incident be debated in a mock trial, with himself representing Scholl. Though students and faculty rejected Nesson’s suggestion, it led to a firestorm of criticism from several students, particularly members of the Black Law Students Association (BLSA).

“The students got very upset,” Nesson said. “I had proposed to make the alleged tort into something we use to learn about torts and learn about ourselves and actually do a mock process. People felt that was egregiously insensitive to the sensibilities to some of the people involved.”

In response, BLSA requested that the administration take “appropriate” action against Nesson and the students responsible for the incidents.

They also asked that Professor of Law M. David Rosenberg be disciplined for a comment he made to his class in March that “feminism, Marxism and the blacks have contributed nothing to torts.”

After some students objected to his language, Rosenberg issued a statement to explain his remarks: “What I criticized was strands of black scholarship—notably, black studies and its contributions to critical race theory and I stand fully behind my criticism.”

On April 8, the administration sent an e-mail to faculty and students that called the recent events “appalling things.” It was signed by Rakoff, HLS Dean Robert C. Clark and Dean of Students Suzanne L. Richardson.

The following week, BLSA organized a silent rally to protest a campus atmosphere they said was “painful and uncomfortable.” The group also met with HLS deans to discuss their requests before the protest.

Some 350 students participated in the protest, listening to speeches delivered by Climenko Professor of Law Charles J. Ogletree Jr. and Fletcher University Professor Cornel R. West ’74 and calling for the creation of an office of multicultural affairs to implement a “clear racial ethnic harassment policy.”

Administrative Responses

Though they strongly condemned Camara’s post, Scholl’s e-mail and the flier as reprehensible, administrators did not reprimand Nesson or Rosenberg for their comments nor relieve them of teaching their first-year classes.

But because of the tensions, Nesson agreed to let Rakoff and Warren Professor of American Legal History Morton J. Horwitz help finish teaching his tort class, though he was present for lectures and administered the final exam.

“The suggestion came from Dean Rakoff—but it was put as a suggestion,” Nesson said.

“The reaction was one of great unhappiness and it was everyone’s judgment that it would be best for everyone that the whole thing calm down,” he said.

Nesson said he will be on leave this coming fall, but will teach an elective first-year class in the winter. His spring responsibilities are still undetermined, but he said this uncertainty is not unusual.

As for the students concerned, the school’s Administrative Board reproached Scholl for the anonymity of his e-mail, but not for its contents, according to Nesson.

HLS spokesperson Michael G. Rodman said he could not comment on disciplinary action taken against students.

Camara said last week there has been no disciplinary action against him and added he has since decided not to post his outlines anymore.

“I don’t think it’s worth putting up with this hassle because I share notes,” he said. “At the same time I think the reaction was perfectly justified and I understand the position of the people that were upset.”

“I think the larger issue it raises is that we do not...have an open, honest and real discussion about issues of race,” Camara said. “We need to talk about race at Harvard Law School.”

And while Rodman said the school is committed to creating a more sensitive environment on campus, with the help of its new initiatives, Nesson said matters remain unresolved.

“So the question that is, to me important...at the school level is whether we digest this experience in a way to bring us out to be a more open environment or whether what happens here just further shuts us down,” Nesson said. “At Harvard Law School, we assemble the greatest legal minds not to talk about fundamental issues?”

—Staff writer Nalina Sombuntham can be reached at sombunth@fas.harvard.edu.