Clark Says Law Review Editor Will Be Investigated

The Harvard Law Review's board of trustees will appoint an investigator to probe charges of racism, sexism and abuse of power leveled against the Review's president.

In an emergency meeting convened Friday morning to address the publicized controversy, the trustees decided to name one or more graduate members of the Review to investigate allegations surrounding Review President Emily R. Schulman '85.

In an interview last night, Law School Dean Robert C. Clark, an ex officio member of the board, said the trustees are considering a number of possible appointees from the Boston area, and hope to reach a decision this week.

"It is very much my desire and that of the trustees to get this resolved as soon as possible," Clark said. "I'm very hopeful that we can work out some resolution in a positive way, and so far everyone has been very cooperative."

Clark sits on the board of trustees with Schulman, Review Treasurer Sam Hirsch, Professor of Law Richard D. Parker, Goldston Professor of Law William D. Andrews and Graduate Treasurer Ernest J. Sargeant.

According to a memo Clark released Friday to Law Review staff members, Schulman and Hirsch "excused themselves" from the meeting when the decision to mount an inquiry was made.

The memo states that the role of the investigators will be "to investigate the principle matters now in dispute at the Review and to report findings and recommendations to the trustees."

Neither Hirsch, Parker nor Andrews would comment for the record last night. Schulman and Sargeant did not return phone messages left at their homes.

The promised investigation is the latest chapter in a divisive dispute that began with a charge of racism made by a Black woman at a September 30 Review staffmeeting.

On October 4, the staff took an unprecedentedvote of "no confidence" in Schulman. The vote wasa tie, with Schulman voting for herself.

The accusations that are mostcontroversial--because Schulman has flatly deniedthem--involve racist and sexist comments sheallegedly made.

According to third-year Review editors speakingon condition of anonymity, Schulman said thatallowing a Black woman to edit an article writtenby Assistant Professor of Law Charles J. OgletreeJr., who is Black, "would be a disaster."

Schulman allegedly said that "this 3-L editorwould be the Black editor on the piece and youknow how complicated that would get."

Editors also alleged that Schulman discourageda female classmate from seeking to advance in theLaw Review hierarchy, because that would mean "tooany women in leadership positions."

In a statement to the Associated Press onSaturday, Schulman said, "I have never assigned orevaluated work at the Harvard Law Review on thebasis of race, gender or any other illegitimatecriteria. I deny the charges which have beenleveled against me, and the media seems anill-suited forum in which to resolve them."

The four Black women editors who initiallyraised the charges--third-years Rhonda Adams,Renee M. Jones, Shelley Simms and StephanieSowell--did not return phone messages left attheir homes last night.

In interviews last week, they said they had metwith President Neil L. Rudenstine and wereconsidering various courses of action, includingbringing suit against Schulman, resigning from theReview and asking the Administrative Board toinvestigate.

The Law Review was at the center of anemotional debate over issues of race and genderlast spring when it published a parody of thefeminist writings of Mary Joe Frug, a New EnglandSchool of Law professor who was murdered inCambridge in the spring of 1991.

At the time, Schulman, who had just become thefourth female president in the history of theReview, was praised for her handling of thesituation

On October 4, the staff took an unprecedentedvote of "no confidence" in Schulman. The vote wasa tie, with Schulman voting for herself.

The accusations that are mostcontroversial--because Schulman has flatly deniedthem--involve racist and sexist comments sheallegedly made.

According to third-year Review editors speakingon condition of anonymity, Schulman said thatallowing a Black woman to edit an article writtenby Assistant Professor of Law Charles J. OgletreeJr., who is Black, "would be a disaster."

Schulman allegedly said that "this 3-L editorwould be the Black editor on the piece and youknow how complicated that would get."

Editors also alleged that Schulman discourageda female classmate from seeking to advance in theLaw Review hierarchy, because that would mean "tooany women in leadership positions."

In a statement to the Associated Press onSaturday, Schulman said, "I have never assigned orevaluated work at the Harvard Law Review on thebasis of race, gender or any other illegitimatecriteria. I deny the charges which have beenleveled against me, and the media seems anill-suited forum in which to resolve them."

The four Black women editors who initiallyraised the charges--third-years Rhonda Adams,Renee M. Jones, Shelley Simms and StephanieSowell--did not return phone messages left attheir homes last night.

In interviews last week, they said they had metwith President Neil L. Rudenstine and wereconsidering various courses of action, includingbringing suit against Schulman, resigning from theReview and asking the Administrative Board toinvestigate.

The Law Review was at the center of anemotional debate over issues of race and genderlast spring when it published a parody of thefeminist writings of Mary Joe Frug, a New EnglandSchool of Law professor who was murdered inCambridge in the spring of 1991.

At the time, Schulman, who had just become thefourth female president in the history of theReview, was praised for her handling of thesituation