Board Denies Bell's Appeal

Former Weld professor of Law derrick A. Bell Jr. said yesterday that the Harvard Corporation has denied his appeal of President Neil L. Rudenstine's decision not to extend his unpaid leave of absence beyond the usual two year limit.

Bell, currently a visiting professor at New York University Law School, took an unpaid leave of absence beginning in April 1990 to protest the lack of women and racial minorities on the Harvard Law School faculty.

"They have decided to affirm President Rudenstine's decision not to extend my leave because of the two year rule," Bell said.

In a letter dated August 14, Corporation members Henry Rosovsky and Charles P. Slichter '45 informed Bell that the governing board would not make an exception to University policy by allowing him a third year on leave, Bell said.

The Corporation made its decision after Bell presented a three-hour appeal before an unprecedented meeting of the Joint Committee of Appointments convened last month especially on Bell's behalf.

Bell said he was disappointed but not surprised by the Corporation's verdict.

"[The decision was] about what I expected," he said.

On July 1, Provost Jerry R. Green announcedthat Bell's refused to return after a second yearon leave would immediately be considered by theUniversity as a resignation of his tenured post.

In a prepared statement released yesterday, theCorporation said that while Bill "stressed hisdevotion to the cause of racial justice and theefforts he has made...to advance that cause," atthe meeting, they did not believe that thosereasons "could serve as a basis for exempting Bellfrom the University policy limiting faculty leavesof absence."

The Corporation stressed the importance of theUniversity policy. "It is an important means toensure that faculty members are present atHarvard, on a regular basis, to carry out theresponsibilities they are committed to perform."

The Corporation also added that at the meeting,Bell "would not commit to returning to Harvard"even if granted a third year on leave.

"We are sorry Professor Bell has chosen towithdraw from the community he seeks to change,"the statement said. The Corporation added that it"wholeheartedly" shares Bell's commitment toincreasing the number of women and minorityfaculty.

Though Bell called the July 29 meeting in a"worthwhile hearing," he chose not to comment onthe specifics of his appeal.

Overseer Renee M. Landers '77, who sits on theJoint Committee on Appointments which heard Bell'sappeal, said that "people were sad to see him go."

Members of the Law School community said thatthey, too were not surprised by the decision.

"[The Corporation] is not particularlysympathetic with issues that Professor Bell hasrepresented over the years," said Camille D.Holmes, who will be a third-year student at thelaw School this fall.

"I don't predict Bell's cause dies with that atall," said Holmes, a member of the Coalition forCivil rights, an organization which has heldfrequent protest rallies and siting about the LawSchool's minority hiring practices.

Though reappointment to signed posts is commonat the University ,Bell said that he has "nocurrent plans for seeking reinstatement atHarvard."

He said he plans to continue for a while in hiscapacity as a visiting professor at New YorkUniversity Law School

On July 1, Provost Jerry R. Green announcedthat Bell's refused to return after a second yearon leave would immediately be considered by theUniversity as a resignation of his tenured post.

In a prepared statement released yesterday, theCorporation said that while Bill "stressed hisdevotion to the cause of racial justice and theefforts he has made...to advance that cause," atthe meeting, they did not believe that thosereasons "could serve as a basis for exempting Bellfrom the University policy limiting faculty leavesof absence."

The Corporation stressed the importance of theUniversity policy. "It is an important means toensure that faculty members are present atHarvard, on a regular basis, to carry out theresponsibilities they are committed to perform."

The Corporation also added that at the meeting,Bell "would not commit to returning to Harvard"even if granted a third year on leave.

"We are sorry Professor Bell has chosen towithdraw from the community he seeks to change,"the statement said. The Corporation added that it"wholeheartedly" shares Bell's commitment toincreasing the number of women and minorityfaculty.

Though Bell called the July 29 meeting in a"worthwhile hearing," he chose not to comment onthe specifics of his appeal.

Overseer Renee M. Landers '77, who sits on theJoint Committee on Appointments which heard Bell'sappeal, said that "people were sad to see him go."

Members of the Law School community said thatthey, too were not surprised by the decision.

"[The Corporation] is not particularlysympathetic with issues that Professor Bell hasrepresented over the years," said Camille D.Holmes, who will be a third-year student at thelaw School this fall.

"I don't predict Bell's cause dies with that atall," said Holmes, a member of the Coalition forCivil rights, an organization which has heldfrequent protest rallies and siting about the LawSchool's minority hiring practices.

Though reappointment to signed posts is commonat the University ,Bell said that he has "nocurrent plans for seeking reinstatement atHarvard."

He said he plans to continue for a while in hiscapacity as a visiting professor at New YorkUniversity Law School