should a lawyer representing Harvey Weinstein be removed as Dean at Harvard

[Republican_Carpetbagger]

This is wrong. Everybody's entitled to a lawyer and lawyers shouldn't be punished for representing people.

[dead0man]

and they caved

I am writing to let you know that Ronald Sullivan and Stephanie Robinson will not be continuing as your Faculty Deans when their term ends on June 30, 2019.

from Reason

Robinson is Sullivan's wife and co-faculty dean of Winthrop House. They were the first African-Americans to serve in this position.

Sullivan, who remains a Harvard law professor, is a man with quite a resume: He advised Sen. Barack Obama on criminal justice issues in 2008, represented the family of Michael Brown in their suit against the city of Ferguson, Missouri, and is responsible for the release of more than 6,000 wrongfully incarcerated people. His clients have included accused murderers and terrorists, consistent with the liberal principle that everyone accused of a crime deserves expert legal representation.

But in the wake of Sullivan's decision to serve as legal counsel for Weinstein, Harvard student-activists have embraced a different view. Danu Mudannayake, one the students leading the campaign to remove Sullivan, described the professor's representation of Weinstein as "not only upsetting, but deeply trauma-inducing" and evidence that he "does not value the safety of students he lives within Winthrop House." According to Mudannayake and her fellow radicals, Sullivan has made Harvard an unsafe and hostile educational environment.

These are absurd accusations, and Khurana foolishly gave credence to them when he agreed to investigate Sullivan a few weeks ago. This was bad enough, but the results of that investigation are worse: Sullivan and Robinson are out.

[brucejoel99]

He'll no longer be the dean of a residential house; it's not as if he's being fired from the University. He's still a department director & is still employed at the school.

That being said, his being on this case may make some students apprehensive to discuss sensitive matters with him. As a dean of an undergraduate house, you're supposed to be there as a support resource & sometimes have to deal with difficult issues. The students who live their have to be comfortable going to their dean with issues & trusting them as an advisor/leader. These students all seem to be both uncomfortable with him as a leader & also stuck in the middle of a lot of chaos, controversy, & general upheaval over the whole thing. They have to be able to function without this getting in the way of their work & just stressing everyone in the house out; from this angle, it seems pretty clear cut to me.

[dead0man]

He'll no longer be the dean of a residential house; it's not as if he's being fired from the University. He's still a department director & is still employed at the school.

That being said, his being on this case may make some students apprehensive to discuss sensitive matters with him. As a dean of an undergraduate house, you're supposed to be there as a support resource & sometimes have to deal with difficult issues. The students who live their have to be comfortable going to their dean with issues & trusting them as an advisor/leader. These students all seem to be both uncomfortable with him as a leader & also stuck in the middle of a lot of chaos, controversy, & general upheaval over the whole thing. They have to be able to function without this getting in the way of their work & just stressing everyone in the house out; from this angle, it seems pretty clear cut to me.

the wilting flowers didn't have problems when he was defending murders, terrorists and unknown rapists.  But you're right, I'm sure these future lawyers with their fragile little brains will never be in a position to represent someone that's a sh**tty person or work with uncomfortable leaders or will be stuck in the middle of a lot of chaos/general upheaval.  We must protect them now so they will know how to avoid stress in the real world (by crying to the powers that be to please make it stop).  Handling stressful situations isn't something you want in a lawyer anyway.

[brucejoel99]

He'll no longer be the dean of a residential house; it's not as if he's being fired from the University. He's still a department director & is still employed at the school.

That being said, his being on this case may make some students apprehensive to discuss sensitive matters with him. As a dean of an undergraduate house, you're supposed to be there as a support resource & sometimes have to deal with difficult issues. The students who live their have to be comfortable going to their dean with issues & trusting them as an advisor/leader. These students all seem to be both uncomfortable with him as a leader & also stuck in the middle of a lot of chaos, controversy, & general upheaval over the whole thing. They have to be able to function without this getting in the way of their work & just stressing everyone in the house out; from this angle, it seems pretty clear cut to me.

the wilting flowers didn't have problems when he was defending murders, terrorists and unknown rapists.  But you're right, I'm sure these future lawyers with their fragile little brains will never be in a position to represent someone that's a sh**tty person or work with uncomfortable leaders or will be stuck in the middle of a lot of chaos/general upheaval.  We must protect them now so they will know how to avoid stress in the real world (by crying to the powers that be to please make it stop).  Handling stressful situations isn't something you want in a lawyer anyway.

I'm so sorry you're offended that students aren't comfortable reporting to this guy in the uncomfortable Harvard climate of under-reported sexual misconduct.

Give me a break.

Also, if you wish to continue being dean of one of these houses, then maybe don't take on literally the highest profile sexual assault case in the country & then act like a gigantic asshole (i.e. suing somebody who wrote an op-ed) when people bring it up.

[Mister Mets]

He'll no longer be the dean of a residential house; it's not as if he's being fired from the University. He's still a department director & is still employed at the school.

That being said, his being on this case may make some students apprehensive to discuss sensitive matters with him. As a dean of an undergraduate house, you're supposed to be there as a support resource & sometimes have to deal with difficult issues. The students who live their have to be comfortable going to their dean with issues & trusting them as an advisor/leader. These students all seem to be both uncomfortable with him as a leader & also stuck in the middle of a lot of chaos, controversy, & general upheaval over the whole thing. They have to be able to function without this getting in the way of their work & just stressing everyone in the house out; from this angle, it seems pretty clear cut to me.

Why would any student feel uncomfortable going to him on a sensitive topic?

[brucejoel99]

He'll no longer be the dean of a residential house; it's not as if he's being fired from the University. He's still a department director & is still employed at the school.

That being said, his being on this case may make some students apprehensive to discuss sensitive matters with him. As a dean of an undergraduate house, you're supposed to be there as a support resource & sometimes have to deal with difficult issues. The students who live their have to be comfortable going to their dean with issues & trusting them as an advisor/leader. These students all seem to be both uncomfortable with him as a leader & also stuck in the middle of a lot of chaos, controversy, & general upheaval over the whole thing. They have to be able to function without this getting in the way of their work & just stressing everyone in the house out; from this angle, it seems pretty clear cut to me.

Why would any student feel uncomfortable going to him on a sensitive topic?

Well, for one thing, he took on literally the highest profile sexual assault case in the country while serving as the dean of a house at a university known for an uncomfortable climate of under-reported sexual misconduct, & then he acted like a gigantic asshole about it (e.g., suing somebody who wrote an op-ed) when people brought it up.

So, considering the uncomfortable Harvard climate of under-reported sexual misconduct, it's very reasonably understood how Harvard students might not be comfortable reporting to this guy who's not only representing literally the highest profile sexual assault defendant in the country, but also being a gigantic asshole about it.

[Mister Mets]

He'll no longer be the dean of a residential house; it's not as if he's being fired from the University. He's still a department director & is still employed at the school.

That being said, his being on this case may make some students apprehensive to discuss sensitive matters with him. As a dean of an undergraduate house, you're supposed to be there as a support resource & sometimes have to deal with difficult issues. The students who live their have to be comfortable going to their dean with issues & trusting them as an advisor/leader. These students all seem to be both uncomfortable with him as a leader & also stuck in the middle of a lot of chaos, controversy, & general upheaval over the whole thing. They have to be able to function without this getting in the way of their work & just stressing everyone in the house out; from this angle, it seems pretty clear cut to me.

Why would any student feel uncomfortable going to him on a sensitive topic?

Well, for one thing, he took on literally the highest profile sexual assault case in the country while serving as the dean of a house at a university known for an uncomfortable climate of under-reported sexual misconduct, & then he acted like a gigantic asshole about it (e.g., suing somebody who wrote an op-ed) when people brought it up.

So, considering the uncomfortable Harvard climate of under-reported sexual misconduct, it's very reasonably understood how Harvard students might not be comfortable reporting to this guy who's not only representing literally the highest profile sexual assault defendant in the country, but also being a gigantic asshole about it.

What lawsuit are you referring to?

[Horus]

Yes,

Because he should have known not to represent Harvey Weinstein

You somehow are wrong on everything, aren't you?

[Esteemed Jimmy]

This is wrong. Everybody's entitled to a lawyer and lawyers shouldn't be punished for representing people.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

If this guy was a public defender I would agree it'd be inappropriate to go after him but it's obvious he's only defending this vile scumbag because said vile scumbag is paying him boatloads of money. He's about as moral as CEOs of company's that do business with the Russian government.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

I'd rather have him defend hundreds of Weinsteins for pure profit than see the precedent under which it becomes normal to punish a lawyer for doing his job. This is a Pandora's Box and if you think it wouldn't have devastating effect in cases involving ordinary folks and their lawyers, then you're naive.

[dead0man]

If this guy was a public defender I would agree it'd be inappropriate to go after him but it's obvious he's only defending this vile scumbag because said vile scumbag is paying him boatloads of money.

so "vile scumbags" (who gets to decide who is a "vile scumbag" and can the potential "vile scumbags" hire people to defend themselves from the accusation?....you see how this is fun, right?) shouldn't be able to hire lawyers?  What if they do it for free?

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

If this guy was a public defender I would agree it'd be inappropriate to go after him but it's obvious he's only defending this vile scumbag because said vile scumbag is paying him boatloads of money.

so "vile scumbags" (who gets to decide who is a "vile scumbag" and can the potential "vile scumbags" hire people to defend themselves from the accusation?....you see how this is fun, right?) shouldn't be able to hire lawyers?  What if they do it for free?

They should be able to hire lawyers but the lawyers shouldn't be surprised if people don't like it. Besides the issue here was concern over how he'd handle on campus sexual assault as dean.

[Dereich]

If this guy was a public defender I would agree it'd be inappropriate to go after him but it's obvious he's only defending this vile scumbag because said vile scumbag is paying him boatloads of money. He's about as moral as CEOs of company's that do business with the Russian government.

Weinstein wouldn't be eligible for a public defender; they are only for the indigent. The only way he could defend himself would be to hire an attorney. Should his attorney be punished for not leaving Weinstein completely unrepresented?

[Mister Mets]

If this guy was a public defender I would agree it'd be inappropriate to go after him but it's obvious he's only defending this vile scumbag because said vile scumbag is paying him boatloads of money.

so "vile scumbags" (who gets to decide who is a "vile scumbag" and can the potential "vile scumbags" hire people to defend themselves from the accusation?....you see how this is fun, right?) shouldn't be able to hire lawyers?  What if they do it for free?

They should be able to hire lawyers but the lawyers shouldn't be surprised if people don't like it. Besides the issue here was concern over how he'd handle on campus sexual assault as dean.

Why would there be any concern about this?