Professor Takes HLS Publication Before Ad Board

The editorial board of the Harvard Law School (HLS) Record has been brought up on charges before the Administrative Board by Weld Professor of Law Charles Nesson '60.

The students named in the action are Record board members Robert Friedman, David Liu and Jaclyn Lui.

Nesson has objected to a February 14 article written by an anonymous student columnist, Fenno, which satirized him and suggested that he used drugs and slept with his students.

"I want [the editorial board] to be forced to defend [their] actions before the HLS community and in job and clerkship interviews," wrote Nesson in a letter published in the February 21 issue of the Record. "I will ask the Administrative Board to reprimand [the editorial board] for publishing the defamatory series."

Although free speech advocates across the law school campus have not necessarily endorsed Fenno's views, they have supported his right to express his opinion.

Frankfurter Professor of Law Alan Dershowitz, another subject of attack in Fenno's piece, has volunteered to defend the students' right to free speech before the ad board.

"While I sympathize with Charlie, I think it is a mistake to discipline students for expressing repugnant views," Dershowitz said. "I would be defending the essential part of free speech, the right to be wrong, the right to offend, the right to be nasty....I don't like [Fenno], but I don't like most of my clients."

Publisher of the Record Robert H. Friedman said that he wants to end the antagonistic relationship between the Record and the faculty, which has resulted from Fenno's columns over the past few weeks.

"We're essentially trying to build bridges back to the faculty that have been burnt down by Fenno," said Friedman.

Friedman said that Fenno plans to apologize in his column in the Record this week, and that he or she will be replaced by a rotating new columnist the week after.

The controversy began to brew in a December 6 column in which Fenno wrote that "the government may only help colored folks and pointy-headed Jews, but God helps those who help themselves" and fermented later in a January 17 column which parodied three professors with the last name of Kennedy.

Forty-two professors responded to these two columns with a signed letter saying that the Fenno's writings are "so repugnant and mean-spirited that it is difficult to understand why the Record would publish them."

But free speech advocates say that disciplining students for speech is not a good idea.

"There can be little doubt that Fenno's writings are protected from any government interference by the first amendment and that the HLS Administrative Board is an inappropriate forum to air personal grievances," wrote Jol A. Silversmith '94, president of the Harvard Law School Civil Liberties Union (HLSCLU) in a letter which will be published in the upcoming issue of the Record.

Silversmith said that HLSCLU is willing to host a forum in order to discuss the place of Fenno in campus discourse.

There is no definitive guide as to what is punishable by the HLS Ad Board because the guide to the Ad Board serves undergraduate students.

According to the "Procedures for Disciplinary Cases," provided by the Dean of Students Office, "cases requiring discipline typically involve cheating, false statements on financial aid applications and similar departures from generally accepted standards of integrity."

"I think the Ad Board will have to decide if this case is in its jurisdiction," said Associate Dean of the Law School Frank E. Sander.

"The fact that [the Fenno case] is not covered in any statutes or rules doesn't mean that it wouldn't fall within the province of the Ad Board, but it is not a grist of the mill case," Sander said.

Dean of the College Harry R. Lewis '68 said he is not aware of any similar incident that has occurred in the College, and he said he stands behind his earlier statement on freedom of speech regarding the Ad Board.

"The College is firmly committed to freedom of the student press; even when it prints pieces that the College believes not to be in the community interest, the College will defend the legitimate right of the press to print them," Lewis wrote in his statement.

Lewis did say however, that if a member of the student press broke the law by printing something libelous or slanderous, then he would be subject to discipline by the Ad Board.

Nesson could not be reached for comment yesterday

There is no definitive guide as to what is punishable by the HLS Ad Board because the guide to the Ad Board serves undergraduate students.

According to the "Procedures for Disciplinary Cases," provided by the Dean of Students Office, "cases requiring discipline typically involve cheating, false statements on financial aid applications and similar departures from generally accepted standards of integrity."

"I think the Ad Board will have to decide if this case is in its jurisdiction," said Associate Dean of the Law School Frank E. Sander.

"The fact that [the Fenno case] is not covered in any statutes or rules doesn't mean that it wouldn't fall within the province of the Ad Board, but it is not a grist of the mill case," Sander said.

Dean of the College Harry R. Lewis '68 said he is not aware of any similar incident that has occurred in the College, and he said he stands behind his earlier statement on freedom of speech regarding the Ad Board.

"The College is firmly committed to freedom of the student press; even when it prints pieces that the College believes not to be in the community interest, the College will defend the legitimate right of the press to print them," Lewis wrote in his statement.

Lewis did say however, that if a member of the student press broke the law by printing something libelous or slanderous, then he would be subject to discipline by the Ad Board.

Nesson could not be reached for comment yesterday