Women Review Editors Publicly Blast Schulman

All but one of the third-year women editors of the Harvard Law Review charged their president with racism, sexism and abuse of power in a stinging letter distributed Wednesday to the board of trustees, Review staff members and President Neil L. Rudenstine.

In a public condemnation that Review editors yesterday called "stunning," 13 of the 14 third-year women on the Review reiterated charges leveled earlier this month against President Emily R. Schulman '85.

The letter states in part that, "We believe that many of the women on the Review have been subjected to a presumption of lesser editorial and managerial competence and have suffered from Emily's unwillingness to appoint women to positions of leadership."

The letter follows a decision last week by the Review's board of trustees to mount an investigation of the charges, and a call to censure Schulman signed by nearly half of the journal's second-year editors.

Schulman last week retained an attorney, thehigh-profile criminal defense lawyer NancyGertner. Gertner did not return repeated callsyesterday.

Responding to Schulman's decision to retainlegal counsel, the four Black women who initiallyraised the charges--third-years Rhonda Adams,Renee M. Jones, Shelley Simms and StephanieSowell--this week retained attorney MargaretBurnham.

Burnham would not comment last night.

At a meeting of the Review staff earlier thismonth, Schulman was charged with discriminatingagainst women and minority editors.

In a statement to The Crimson last nightSchulman denied the charges against her and saidshe had retained an attorney in hopes that thecontroversy could be resolved "accurately."

"I am chagrined that some members of the LawReview persist in lobbying students, facultymembers, Law School administrators, the presidentof the University, prospective employers and themedia regarding the charges that have been leviedagainst me. These charges are too serious and theprinciples underlying them too important toresolve through a trial by media," Schulman'sstatement said.

Vikki Wulf, the only woman not to sign theletter distributed this week, would not commentlast night. Another third-year woman, who joinedthe Review just this year unlike the others, alsodid not sign the letter.

According to Law School Dean Robert C. Clark,an ex officio member of the board of trustees, thetrustees will likely appoint an investigator orgroup of investigators sometime next week. He saidthe trustees are speaking with a "quitesubstantial" number of former Review editorscurrently residing in the Boston area.

In a letter sent to the trustees this week andlater released to the full staff of the Review,Adams, Jones, Simms and Sowell stated their desirethat the investigator be "credible and impartialto both sides."

The women's letter asks that the investigatorshave experience with discrimination cases, noprofessional involvement with the Law School andhave no association with any firm which has hiredor offered to hire Schulman.

According to the letter and to third-yeareditors speaking on the condition of anonymity,the four Black women have been contacted by Timemagazine, the Today Show and WHDH-TV, Channel 7.However, Gertner, Schulman's attorney, informedthem that if they refrained from speaking to themedia she and her client would do the same.

In interviews this week, Review editors saidthat Schulman has lost credibility and is widelyviewed with shock and disgust.

"She won't move, she won't even consider doinganything to let it get back to normal," one editorsaid. "Things are just in chaos. People just don'thave confidence."

The editor voiced approval for the trustee'sinvestigation. "If you're going to have thesefacts in dispute you might as well investigatethem and find out she's lying, since she won'tadmit it," the editor said.

A different editor, who also asked to remainanonymous, said that Schulman's refusal to resignsurprises some staff members. "Some peopleare...upset that she hasn't resigned, and she'sscrewing up the Law Review just to save herself,"the editor said. "I think it tarnishes the image.It looks like we can't get our shit together, andit's probably true."

Schulman has said repeatedly she has no plansto resign.

The controversy plaguing the Review began witha charge of racism made by a Black woman at aSeptember 30 Review staff meeting. On October 4,the staff took an unprecedented vote of "noconfidence" in Schulman. The vote was a tie, withSchulman voting for herself.

The accusations that are most controversialinvolve racist and sexist comments she allegedlymade.

According to editors interviewed during thepast two weeks, Schulman said that allowing aBlack woman to edit an article written byAssistant 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 fellow classmate from seeking to advance in theLaw Review hierarchy, because that would mean "toomany women in leadership positions."

The calls for formal action against Schulmanhave increased in the last week.

In a statement released last week, 17second-year editors said at least one occasionSchulman had discriminated against a staff memberon the basis of race.

"We firmly condemn that conduct. We feel thatthe body should censure the president," thestatement said.

Of the Review's 11 executives, chosen by amixture of popular vote and presidentialdiscretion, two, including Schulman, are women.

The Law Review, one of the nation's mostprestigious law journals, 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 slain in Cambridge in thespring of 1991.

The parody was widely condemend by students andfaculty, but the school was divided on whether theincident was symptomatic of deeper problems withinthe organization.

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

At least one editor said yesterday the stringof controversies could serve to shake-up the LawReview.

"Maybe some good change will come out of it,"the editor said.CrimsonDavid E. RosenLaw School Dean ROBERT C. CLARK, criticizedlast spring for his response to the controversialLaw Review parody issue, says the journal'strustees will probably appoint an investigator toexamine the charges this fall against ReviewPresident Emily R. Schulman '85. Clark is an exofficio member of the board of trustees.

Schulman last week retained an attorney, thehigh-profile criminal defense lawyer NancyGertner. Gertner did not return repeated callsyesterday.

Responding to Schulman's decision to retainlegal counsel, the four Black women who initiallyraised the charges--third-years Rhonda Adams,Renee M. Jones, Shelley Simms and StephanieSowell--this week retained attorney MargaretBurnham.

Burnham would not comment last night.

At a meeting of the Review staff earlier thismonth, Schulman was charged with discriminatingagainst women and minority editors.

In a statement to The Crimson last nightSchulman denied the charges against her and saidshe had retained an attorney in hopes that thecontroversy could be resolved "accurately."

"I am chagrined that some members of the LawReview persist in lobbying students, facultymembers, Law School administrators, the presidentof the University, prospective employers and themedia regarding the charges that have been leviedagainst me. These charges are too serious and theprinciples underlying them too important toresolve through a trial by media," Schulman'sstatement said.

Vikki Wulf, the only woman not to sign theletter distributed this week, would not commentlast night. Another third-year woman, who joinedthe Review just this year unlike the others, alsodid not sign the letter.

According to Law School Dean Robert C. Clark,an ex officio member of the board of trustees, thetrustees will likely appoint an investigator orgroup of investigators sometime next week. He saidthe trustees are speaking with a "quitesubstantial" number of former Review editorscurrently residing in the Boston area.

In a letter sent to the trustees this week andlater released to the full staff of the Review,Adams, Jones, Simms and Sowell stated their desirethat the investigator be "credible and impartialto both sides."

The women's letter asks that the investigatorshave experience with discrimination cases, noprofessional involvement with the Law School andhave no association with any firm which has hiredor offered to hire Schulman.

According to the letter and to third-yeareditors speaking on the condition of anonymity,the four Black women have been contacted by Timemagazine, the Today Show and WHDH-TV, Channel 7.However, Gertner, Schulman's attorney, informedthem that if they refrained from speaking to themedia she and her client would do the same.

In interviews this week, Review editors saidthat Schulman has lost credibility and is widelyviewed with shock and disgust.

"She won't move, she won't even consider doinganything to let it get back to normal," one editorsaid. "Things are just in chaos. People just don'thave confidence."

The editor voiced approval for the trustee'sinvestigation. "If you're going to have thesefacts in dispute you might as well investigatethem and find out she's lying, since she won'tadmit it," the editor said.

A different editor, who also asked to remainanonymous, said that Schulman's refusal to resignsurprises some staff members. "Some peopleare...upset that she hasn't resigned, and she'sscrewing up the Law Review just to save herself,"the editor said. "I think it tarnishes the image.It looks like we can't get our shit together, andit's probably true."

Schulman has said repeatedly she has no plansto resign.

The controversy plaguing the Review began witha charge of racism made by a Black woman at aSeptember 30 Review staff meeting. On October 4,the staff took an unprecedented vote of "noconfidence" in Schulman. The vote was a tie, withSchulman voting for herself.

The accusations that are most controversialinvolve racist and sexist comments she allegedlymade.

According to editors interviewed during thepast two weeks, Schulman said that allowing aBlack woman to edit an article written byAssistant 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 fellow classmate from seeking to advance in theLaw Review hierarchy, because that would mean "toomany women in leadership positions."

The calls for formal action against Schulmanhave increased in the last week.

In a statement released last week, 17second-year editors said at least one occasionSchulman had discriminated against a staff memberon the basis of race.

"We firmly condemn that conduct. We feel thatthe body should censure the president," thestatement said.

Of the Review's 11 executives, chosen by amixture of popular vote and presidentialdiscretion, two, including Schulman, are women.

The Law Review, one of the nation's mostprestigious law journals, 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 slain in Cambridge in thespring of 1991.

The parody was widely condemend by students andfaculty, but the school was divided on whether theincident was symptomatic of deeper problems withinthe organization.

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

At least one editor said yesterday the stringof controversies could serve to shake-up the LawReview.

"Maybe some good change will come out of it,"the editor said.CrimsonDavid E. RosenLaw School Dean ROBERT C. CLARK, criticizedlast spring for his response to the controversialLaw Review parody issue, says the journal'strustees will probably appoint an investigator toexamine the charges this fall against ReviewPresident Emily R. Schulman '85. Clark is an exofficio member of the board of trustees.