Clark Letter Condemns Student Sit-Ins

Law School Dean Robert C. Clark yesterday condemned recent student sit-ins protesting the school's women and minority faculty hiring record and said the school's Administrative Board will consider disciplinary action against the students.

In a letter to the Law School community, Clark discouraged students from using such forms of protest and instead emphasized the advantages of open discussion and debate.

"Open discussion--even very heated discussion--is far more likely to lead to mutual understanding and effective advocacy of well-founded views," Clark wrote.

The sit-ins earlier this month were part of an ongoing controversy over minority faculty hiring at the Law School. Of the 64 tenured or tenure-track faculty members at the school, three are Black men and three are white women. There are no Latinos or Asian Americans on the faculty.

Students staged a 15-minute sit-in the office of Carter Professor of General Jurisprudence Charles Fried on March 18 and a similar one the next day in Professor of Law Reinier H. Kraakman's office.

The students said they were trying to focus attention on professors who may be slowing the school's effort to recruit women and minority faculty members.

Kraakman, a member of a factuly committee which nominates candidates for tenure, described the sit-in in his office as "disruptive and unpleasant" and said he agreed with Clark that "dialogue is the best thing."

In his letter, Clark pointed to several discussions which have already taken place, including as an open forum which 300 students attended on March 5.

According to the letter, similar meetings have already been scheduled for April.

The Ad Board complaint was filed by Fried, with Kraakman submitting a supporting document.

"It is a violation of a good order of the school," Fried said in an interview last night. "If you don't file a complaint, nothing happens, and it just goes on. Somebody has to be made aware of it some-how."

Clark's letter also said a boycott of classes scheduled for tomorrow was "misguided." Fried said that though he too disapproved of the boycott, he did not expect it to be grounds for any further disciplinary actions.

"If a student doesn't want to go to class, that's his prerogative," he said. "I think it's foolish, but it's not like occupying a class or disturbing the function of the school."