SUBSCRIBE NOW WELCOME BACK. Do you want to continue reading where you left off? New Republic subscribers can pick up where they left off no matter which device they were previously using. SUBSCRIBE NOW

Go Home Everyone’s Dean

POLITICS APRIL 19, 2010

Everyone’s Dean

Some years ago, I told my colleague Jack Goldsmith, when his role in revoking the notorious Yoo-Bybee torture memos became public, that the only thing worse than being demonized by the left is being lionized by the left. It works both ways, though. The media like to pin a one-word--or if they are more nuanced, one-phrase--epithet on public figures, as Homer would on his gods and heroes (grey-eyed Athena, wily Odysseus). They have decided to attach the term "conservative" (or for the more subtle: "relatively conservative") to solicitor general and former Harvard Law School Dean Elena Kagan. A lot of people--myself included--have described Kagan's many remarkable qualities in many places. Here I want only to explain how she got this dubious sobriquet, one that is unlikely to do her much good: For lefties, it disqualifies her as the new torchbearer for their causes now that Justice Stevens is retiring; and for the right--well, they just won't believe that anyone with a big job in this administration can have any real good about her. Some episodes from her deanship at Harvard, where I've taught for many years, will give the flavor of how she garnered this particularly accolade, if accolade it is.

In February 2005 the student branch of the Federalist Society (a group founded in the early '80s to explore and promote conservative and libertarian perspectives on the law) held its national jamboree at Harvard Law School. At the banquet in a downtown hotel, Kagan rose to speak the host institutions' words of greeting to the thousand or so Federalists assembled from every corner of the country. She was greeted by a long and raucous ovation. With a broad grin and her unmistakable Upper West Side twang, the former Clinton White House official responded: "You are not my people." This brought the dark-suited crowd of Federalist students to their feet in a roar of affectionate approval. (It is worth a footnote that the next day the same group also cheered Larry Summers--God bless the Federalists.)

Another episode: When my colleague Mary Ann Glendon--a favorite of the last pope and President Bush's ambassador to the Vatican--awarded the inaugural Bradley Prize, a kind of MacArthur prize on the right, Kagan organized a celebratory dinner for her and invited not only her faculty friends, but the officers of the various student groups, including the Mormon group, she advises. Finally, when our alumnus Antonin Scalia, reached his twentieth anniversary on the Supreme Court, she arranged a gala celebratory dinner, at which she warmly introduced him to the assembly of faculty and students. (Harold Koh, dean at Yale, bestirred himself to do the same, but he could not bring himself to speak any warm words of introduction. He left that to a faculty member who had been Scalia's clerk.)

Now I know she has done just the same sort of thing (I just wasn't invited) for the law school's chapter of the American Constitution Society--a kind of latter-day lefty knockoff of the Federalists--understandably enjoying something of a vogue these days. And she has devised events celebrating the publication of books by liberal professors Cass Sunstein and Mark Tushnet. She has managed to get the once notoriously faction-ridden faculty to embrace the appointment not only of former Scalia and Kennedy clerks, but also of several hard lefties, both categories of persons who previously could not have made it to the floor of the faculty. And when the Third Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the Solomon Amendment could not constitutionally be applied to cut off funds to Harvard because our placement office's longstanding anti-discrimination policy requires it to bar military recruiters, it was she who put that policy back in force.

Does this all mean that she is some kind of crypto-Republican who would shift the Court to the right? And what does her behavior as dean tell us about her ideology? My clear answers are no and nothing. I do not doubt that her heart beats on the left. After all, she clerked for Abner Mikva and Thurgood Marshall, two of the most liberal judges to sit on their respective courts, and she calls Marshall her legal hero. No, what it all tells us is that she came to Harvard Law School at a critical time in its history and determined that it was her job to make the biggest, richest, and most famous law school in the world also the best. And that she would do it by recruiting excellent teachers from across the ideological spectrum. That she would make students with every point of view feel as if they were part of an intellectual and professional enterprise. That the students and faculty should feel this was not just a place to come to work and an experience to be endured, but an enjoyable and satisfying part of a life that should be satisfying and enjoyable in its entirety. She saw that was her job; that was her role. She threw herself into it wholeheartedly. And she succeeded.

Author's Note: In this article, I make the following parenthetical remark after noting Dean Kagan’s hosting of a dinner for Justice Scalia: “Harold Koh, dean at Yale, bestirred himself to do the same, but he could not bring himself to speak any warm words of introduction. He left that to a faculty member who had been Scalia's clerk.”  My friend, Yale law professor Christine Jolls, the former clerk I mention, assures me that the arrangement was meant to honor, not disparage the justice, and that he took it that way. Knowing Christine as I do, I am sure she is right.

Charles Fried teaches constitutional law and contracts at Harvard Law School, where he has been on the faculty since 1961. He was solicitor general of the United States during the second Reagan administration and from 1995 to 1999 he was an associate justice on the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court.

For more TNR, become a fan on Facebook and follow us on Twitter.

SHARE YOUR THOUGHTS

Show all 5 comments

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

5 comments

If the left wants a justice who can persuade others to her point of view, this recommendation shows she may be able to do that better than other candidates. Perhaps not right away, but in a decade or so...who knows?

- Tilghman

April 19, 2010 at 1:08pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

If these are the types of "references" she will continue to receive, she sounds like an impeccable candidate for the Court and everyone should just grow up and not search for and pick political nits. The continued elevation of intellectualism and professionalism is one of the most important things this administration can continue to do.

- ericad

April 19, 2010 at 1:53pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"And that she would do it by recruiting excellent teachers from across the ideological spectrum. " I would like to believe she learned the benefits of that approach from her time at the University of Chicago. :)

- DWAnderson

April 20, 2010 at 3:12pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I don't see how being dean of a law school, even a good dean of a good law school, qualifiesanyone, including Ms. Kagan, for appointment to the Supreme Court after little or no practice experience other than, of course, a year or so as S.G. I read a transcript of one of her cases, whose name I cannot recall, that did not sound (or at least read) much like a legal argument, and it almost seemed that the Court was helping her through it. Ms. Kagan has also taken some disappointing and very Bush-like positions in national security and government secrecy cases, which I concede may not have been her choice alone. But she cannot escape responsibility for taking these positions. I see niceness, not distinction here, and I do not think that quality necessarily makes Ms.Kagan a good replacement for Justice Stevens. It seems to me that women nominated or suggested for the Supreme Court recently are being viewed through a slightly different prism focusing on their politeness and docility, or lack of same, rather than their legal acumen and liberal credentials.

- mlottman

April 20, 2010 at 11:07pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I wager that any recommendation from TNR will be the kiss of death for any candidate...sorry, but hiding under a conservative banner won't save Kagan (or anyone else TNR would recommend...)

- peterkussell

April 23, 2010 at 12:54am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

SHARE HIGHLIGHT

0 CHARACTERS SELECTED

TWEET THIS

POST TO TUMBLR

SHARE ON FACEBOOK

Close