Speaker 1: Welcome to the Bloomberg Law Podcast. I'm June Grosso. Every
Speaker 1: day we bring you insight and analysis into the most
Speaker 1: important legal news of the day. You can find more
Speaker 1: episodes at the Bloomberg Law Podcast, on Apple podcast, SoundCloud,
Speaker 1: and on Bloomberg dot com slash podcasts. Harvard law professors
Speaker 1: have long represented unpopular causes and notorious defendants O. J.
Speaker 1: Simpson to name just one. After all, every defendant has
Speaker 1: a constitutional right to an attorney. But now a Harvard
Speaker 1: law professor joining the defense team for Harvey Weinstein is
Speaker 1: causing controversy at Harvard, from protests and petitions calling for
Speaker 1: his aust as the Winthrop House faculty dean, to a
Speaker 1: review of the living climate among the undergraduates at the
Speaker 1: house by the college. Harvard Law professor Ronald Sullivan is
Speaker 1: a renowned criminal defense attorney who represented Aaron Hernandez and
Speaker 1: his acquittal on a double murder charge and helped free
Speaker 1: thousands of wrongfully incarcerated inmates in new or lends after
Speaker 1: Hurricane Katrina. He's also the first African American to be
Speaker 1: named as a faculty dean of an undergraduate house in
Speaker 1: Harvard's history. Fifty four Harvard Law professor assigned a letter
Speaker 1: supporting Sullivan and his legal advocacy in service of constitutional principles,
Speaker 1: joining me as Harvard Law Professor Elizabeth Bartholett, one of
Speaker 1: the organizers of that letter of support, tell me a
Speaker 1: little bit about Professor Sullivan's legal work. Professor Sullivan has
Speaker 1: a long history as a criminal defense attorney. He was
Speaker 1: with the Public Defender's Office in Washington, d C. Representing
Speaker 1: indigent people accused of crimes, and at Harvard Law School,
Speaker 1: where he has an appointment on the faculty, he helps
Speaker 1: run programs for students who are interested in doing criminal
Speaker 1: defense work. He's also had a practice on the side
Speaker 1: of representing various people accused of all kinds of crimes
Speaker 1: over the years, so that's a large part of his persona.
Speaker 1: He's also helped create systems for the representation of poor people,
Speaker 1: so is a long history as a criminal defense attorney,
Speaker 1: most of it devoted to representing poor people who otherwise
Speaker 1: wouldn't get a defense. So he agrees to become part
Speaker 1: of Harvey Weinstein's defense team and students start to complain
Speaker 1: what are their concerns One other things. Professor Rowland Friar
Speaker 1: another African American professor at the university, was accused of
Speaker 1: sexual harassment and has been under investigation by Harvard for that,
Speaker 1: and Professor Sullivan also agreed in some capacity to represent
Speaker 1: him or advise him, and the students initially objected to
Speaker 1: his representation of both Professor Fryer and Harvey Weinstein. Well,
Speaker 1: what are the students concerns? Do they not recognize the
Speaker 1: constitutional right to have an attorney represent you. I can't
Speaker 1: speak for the students, and I think more recently the
Speaker 1: students have claimed that they understand people have a right
Speaker 1: to criminal defense, but that they're saying that a House
Speaker 1: dean doesn't have the right necessarily to represent all people
Speaker 1: accused of crimes. So I think they're emphasizing that now.
Speaker 1: I stressed that simply to be fear of what the
Speaker 1: students are claiming, not because I think their most recent
Speaker 1: claim is necessarily true in terms of what they're about,
Speaker 1: And in any event, I don't think it's justified as
Speaker 1: a reason to be trying to push him out. So
Speaker 1: you were one of the professors who circulated a letter
Speaker 1: that fifty two Harvard law professors sign. I think it's
Speaker 1: fifty four in total. An astounding number. It's just, you know,
Speaker 1: the law school faculty is large, but that's astounding number
Speaker 1: given that it's almost always impossible to get a member
Speaker 1: of the law school faculty to sign something that they
Speaker 1: didn't right themselves. So I think it's a very strong
Speaker 1: statement of how strongly people on this law faculty feel
Speaker 1: about the idea that somebody is being attacked for his
Speaker 1: representation of a criminal defendant, and also that Harvard is
Speaker 1: taking the position it is on that. So the emphasis
Speaker 1: on the letter is really Harvard's role, not the student's role.
Speaker 1: The letter recognizes its students have a right to protest.
Speaker 1: The letter emphasizes that Harvard should not be hounding Professor
Speaker 1: sellisant out based on his representation. And I think I
Speaker 1: would just like to emphasize that, you know, I'm one
Speaker 1: of the fifty four, and I certainly believe in the letter,
Speaker 1: but my own concerns really are very largely with the
Speaker 1: role Harvard has played here in that Harvard has done
Speaker 1: nothing to discourage or control or sanctioned the student's conduct,
Speaker 1: even when it involved graffiti. And you know, it's the
Speaker 1: arguable threats that go along with the kind of graffiti
Speaker 1: that we're posted Harvard did nothing, It has done nothing
Speaker 1: to defend or protect Professor's Sullivan, but it has completely
Speaker 1: undermined him. They're clearly, as best I can read what
Speaker 1: we're allowed to see, trying to hound him out of
Speaker 1: this position and pressure him to resign. And I think
Speaker 1: that it's on Harvard's part, a completely on principled position.
Speaker 1: Tell me about this climate survey of Winter House Climate
Speaker 1: review of winterprice. The climate review appears to be, as
Speaker 1: again as best I can read, the tea leaves here
Speaker 1: part of Harvard's attempt to drive Professor Sullivan out. So
Speaker 1: they are doing something that's extraordinarily rare, and we don't
Speaker 1: know of it's being done in another situation where a
Speaker 1: Harvard dean has been accused of something or challenged by
Speaker 1: the students and it's you know, enormously threatening, is obviously
Speaker 1: there are some students in the House who are unhappy,
Speaker 1: and Harvard pears to be saying that if there are
Speaker 1: enough that are just made quote uncomfortable, then you know,
Speaker 1: maybe that's reason to get rid of him as House deeing.
Speaker 1: In an interview with New York Magazine, Professor Sullivan said
Speaker 1: that he thought this climate review was racially motivated. Do
Speaker 1: you agree. I'm not going to say I agree or
Speaker 1: disagree with that. I'll just say that he is the
Speaker 1: first and is the only African American dean of a
Speaker 1: Harvard House, and I know of no other incident of
Speaker 1: a dean being driven out. And I will point out
Speaker 1: that there seems to be something of a pattern so far.
Speaker 1: Visibly a pattern of two is Professor Rowland Friar being
Speaker 1: subjected to an ongoing investigation that at least there's one
Speaker 1: long investigative reporters piece that indicates that Harvard's challenge to
Speaker 1: an attack on Professor Rowland Fryar, a very distinguished economics professor,
Speaker 1: is deeply unfair. Um, so we've got that, We've got
Speaker 1: Ron Sullivan, and it's is problematic, if small, so far pattern.
Speaker 1: I mean, I'm not a criminal defense attorney myself, and
Speaker 1: I chose not to be one because honestly, I would
Speaker 1: not represent anyone simply because they needed representation. Um, even
Speaker 1: though I think everybody deserves some representation. But I'm big
Speaker 1: on lawyers exercising their own sort of ethical standards in
Speaker 1: deciding whom to represent. And obviously Harvey Weinstein could get
Speaker 1: other representation. What I'm concerned with about Harvard is one
Speaker 1: that on a complicated issue, it takes a totally simplistic,
Speaker 1: one sided position. So the complicated issue is how do
Speaker 1: we think about issues of sexual assault and sexual harassment?
Speaker 1: And there are in these situations alleged victims and alleged perpetrators,
Speaker 1: and it's complicated because victim claims aren't always true and
Speaker 1: perpetrators aren't always guilty of everything that they're charged with.
Speaker 1: And yet Harvard on this issue appears, at least in
Speaker 1: recent many years now, only to take positions when they
Speaker 1: can take positions on what looks to be the side
Speaker 1: of alleged victims. And Harvard shows zero concern with the rights,
Speaker 1: including rights to truth seeking process when they involved alleged perpetrators.
Speaker 1: In this recent instance, Professor Sullivan is somebody who has
Speaker 1: represented while he's been at Harvard and in the house
Speaker 1: being position, he has represented a terrorist, he has represented
Speaker 1: a murderer. He has also represented alleged victims of sexual harassment.
Speaker 1: And the only problem Harvard has with him is when
Speaker 1: he represents an alleged perpetrator of sexual assault. So you know,
Speaker 1: there's it's one issue. It's decided to have to be
Speaker 1: on the rightically correct side of all the time. That's
Speaker 1: all it cares about. I'm wondering if it's because of
Speaker 1: the Me too movement and the power of the Me
Speaker 1: too movement. It's affected all kinds of people in our society,
Speaker 1: from movie stars to politicians to know law professors. Now, absolutely,
Speaker 1: you're right, it's the Me too movement. It's the pressure
Speaker 1: that students are applying to Harvard that is related to
Speaker 1: the Me too movement. Now, there are other people out there,
Speaker 1: There are women out there, there are women's rights activists
Speaker 1: out there who also thinks true sexual assault, true sexual
Speaker 1: harassment is a bad thing and should be addressed and
Speaker 1: victims should be treated properly. But not everybody agrees that
Speaker 1: any and everyone accused of sexual harassment, or who defends
Speaker 1: somebody accused of sexual harassment, you know, is an evil
Speaker 1: that should be removed and taken down and fired from
Speaker 1: the job, etcetera. So some people think we should address
Speaker 1: sexual reressment, but you know, take a more considered position
Speaker 1: and consider the rights of those who are accused, because
Speaker 1: there might be wrongful accusations. So Harvard is responding to
Speaker 1: pressure here. It has pressure from one side, So there's
Speaker 1: a me too movement. Yes, it is more sort of
Speaker 1: vocal groups who are on the side of almost always
Speaker 1: assume the person accused is guilty and go after him
Speaker 1: to the max. And that's the pressure they're responding to.
Speaker 1: So the loudest students who are rounding the biggest protests
Speaker 1: at Harvard's are anti Sullivan. They're not the only ones.
Speaker 1: There are other people who have other views that include students.
Speaker 1: There were two students who wrote into the Crimson asking
Speaker 1: for their letters to be published who were victims of
Speaker 1: sexual harassment that Ron Sullivan had represented. The Crimson refused
Speaker 1: to publish their letters, So there is pressure there. But
Speaker 1: Harvard only wants to respond to the most loud mouthed
Speaker 1: pressure and it is doing that, And yes, that relates
Speaker 1: to me to movement. My feeling is that Harvard University
Speaker 1: is in a position to stand on principle, not simply
Speaker 1: to respond to pressure. And that's all they're doing. And
Speaker 1: I think that the student pressure, and yes it's a
Speaker 1: sort of a larger pressure beyond the students, that this
Speaker 1: fits in with the meetch movement pressure and we want
Speaker 1: Harvard to look good and that means get rid of Sulivan.
Speaker 1: Thanks for being on Bloomberg Law. That's Harvard Law Professor
Speaker 1: Elizabeth Bartha Lett. Thanks for listening to the Bloomberg Law podcast.
Speaker 1: You can subscribe and listen to the show on Apple Podcasts, SoundCloud,
Speaker 1: and on Bloomberg dot com slash podcasts. I'm June Brosso.
Speaker 1: This is Bloomberg. Ya.