The MailLAW AND EDUCATION CENTER

To the Editors of the CRIMSON:

It is an old and not very interesting game to point up CRIMSON reportorial inaccuracies. The two articles dealing with the Center for Law and Education had their share, including overstating both the number of people whose contracts were not renewed, and the number of alleged "protest" resignations. More important than these factual errors, or the complex issues of personality and structure pertinent to each individual decision, is the CRIMSON statement that the Center is shifting emphasis from law reform activities to legal research.

Quite the opposite is true: over the past year the Center has undertaken substantial involvement in a variety of law reform efforts, including some precedent-making lawsuits and major administrative and legislative advances. We will continue-and indeed expand-such efforts, with a staff that promises to be talented, experienced, and highly-motivated.

The CRIMSON statement is not only wrong: it threatens to undercut valued relationships with legal services offices, other law reform agencies, and constituency groups such as the National Welfare Rights Organization-the people who are bringing about educational change. We will expand our efforts to help them.

[Mr. Kirp's account of the number of contracts not being renewed takes into consideration only four staff attorneys directly employed by the CLE; it fails to include another attorney supported by a federal grant whose association with the Center is being terminated. The stated number of "protest resignations"-two-is based on statements given by the editor of "Inequality and Education" and his assistant, who have resigned their posts effective June '71.

In the two articles concerning the CLE, at no time was it stated as a matter of fact that the Center has shifted emphasis from law reform activities to legal research. Rather, this possibility was mentioned as the opinion of several of the staff attorneys at the CLE. At least three staff attorneys said in interviews that they feared the Center may be shifting away from litigation and toward research. This was so reported; that the Center "has undertaken substantial involvement in a variety of law reform efforts" over the past year was at no point denied. Eds.]