LETTERS TO THE EDITOR: Diversity and law journals

To the Editor: First, the article gave the impression that two of the Law School's student-run journals have recently instituted new diversity policies. In fact, diversity policies have been annually implemented by each student board of the Law Review since 1983, and of the Journal of International Economic Law since 1993. Each new board determines its own policies on a range of issues, including whether or not to address the question of diversity. The actions of the Law Review and JIEL this year are hardly a "policy change." Second, the article mentioned a "certain number of racial minority and women editors on future boards." This is an error in two ways: There is no fixed number, but a target percentage of minorities and women -- provided the candidates meet certain scoring guidelines; and, these students are being chosen as associate editors, not board members. Third, the number of students selected for places on the three journals tops 100, not the 30 to 35 mentioned in the article. Of these more than 100 students, perhaps a handful are added for diversity. Fourth, Frank Scaturro, the Law student who resigned from the JIEL board in protest of these target percentages, is wrong if he refers to them as a "substitution policy." As I have told him on three separate occasions, the diversity policy works by adding high-scoring individuals from groups underrepresented on the publications. No student is "bumped" to make way for another. Finally, in conversations I had with Mike Fahey, editor-in-chief of JIEL, it was clearly his board's preference that Scaturro remain an active member and seek to address the policy issues next fall when, without the pressure of looming exams, the journals' editorial boards may be joined by students, faculty and administrators in a discussion of whether, how and why a diverse representation of qualified students may be achieved. Gary Clinton Dean of Students Law School n To the Editor: The article "Law journals implement affirmative action policy" (DP, 4/23/96) conveyed much of this regrettable situation to our university, but I could not join any student speculation that the policy was adopted -- or is currently being defended -- primarily on its merits. If I believed my reservations had been addressed, I probably would not have taken this issue to the first-year Law School class; I have yet to hear an argument that this policy remedies past discrimination against those who benefit from it. I don't know whether I've ever been so strongly pressured to support a policy so blindly, and the Journal of International Economic Law's "diversity" policy hurts people through gratuitous race and gender discrimination. Meanwhile, characterizing the slots that would be subject to discrimination as "add-ons" rather than "substitutions" is, from the discussion I witnessed, a ruse that consciously aims to offend fewer people. Since a journal that can use x number of people has the power to determine those slots however it wishes, I see something disingenuous about this. It might disappoint those who believe that loyalty to an academic journal compelled me to support something I believe is wrong, but I just couldn't hold my nose and jump on this policy. Frank Scaturro Law '97 Post-Spring Fling feedback To the Editor: It was with a great sense of pride and empowerment that I read the editorial "Spoiling our fun" (DP, 4/22/96). It is rare that so short a piece evokes such strong waves of emotion in an individual, but I now truly sense just how oppressive the University administration has become. What with their archaic notions of "obeying the law" and of creating an atmosphere that is "scholarly" and "intellectual," they have shortsightedly denied us our rights! Our rights to underage drinking, our rights to disturbing the peace of non-Flingers -- when will the madness end?! Don't they realize we are nothing without our "party school" reputation? Not since the French Revolution has so important a call to arms been issued -- the student body must now answer that call. Then again, if our "party school" reputation got us up to number 11 in the rankings, one can only imagine what Fling must be like at Harvard, Yale and Princeton? Aaron Ross College '96 n To the Editor: I appreciate being properly quoted in "LCE citations dampen Fling spirit for some" (DP, 4/22/96), but I found two aspects of the situation troubling. Partially quoting a newsgroup post is that easily lends remarks to being quoted out of context. From your quote, a reader would never be able to tell that I'm staunchly opposed to the binge drinking that takes place at Penn (and at other schools). Special consideration should be given to the nature of the medium being sourced. A reasonable solution to this problem would be to add the Message ID ("") or the name of the thread ("LCE and Spring Fling") to the quotation, allowing readers to read the posting and/or thread in its entirety. The most important problem with being quoted from a Netnews posting is that it could have been easily forged. Your reporters took for granted that I actually posted the article in question, without verifying the validity of the post (I am unaware of any efforts made to contact me regarding the quoted text). Your reporters obviously have access to e-mail; I strongly urge them to use it. Roman Gollent College '97 Relays block gym access To the Editor: Posted on the door of Hutchinson Gymnasium is a sign listing what days Hutch will be closed preceding the Penn Relays. Recreation Director Robert Glascott informed me that today, Friday and Saturday, Hutch's locker rooms will be required for some of the 10,000 athletes competing this weekend. A pasta dinner will be held for them in Hutch on Friday night. But Hutch's facilities are not required for any athletic events, according to Glascott. Why must I and hundreds of other students who pay to use Hutch's facilities be denied access to them because of these visitors? Glascott noted that the prestige the University garners from Relays is paramount, and that a three-day inconvenience, essentially, is not the end of the world. Pause for a moment and consider a larger question, "Who wins during the Penn Relays?" Not only could I care less about them, but worse than that, their very presence is a major imposition on our campus and student body? The only time I did not feel safe on campus last year was Relays weekend. So, as you stroll around campus tomorrow night, weigh all the "prestige" of the Relays against what you have been subjected to. Adam Stein-Sapir Wharton '98