MERE PUFFERY
From the last comment thread, appalled says this:
_____
Fumare: Can you open a new box where students and alum can express their views on 1: the chances of AMSL surviving this terrible scandal?
2: the dean surviving?
3: the fired law faculty returning?
4: the ABA intervening to press for the independnece of AMSL under a new name?
appalled | 08.30.07 - 8:15 am | #
_____
1. As any sort of first rate institution, probably not good. As a place where you can go to learn a lot about Jesus, the Pope, and Monaghan's warped brand of Catholicism with a little legal education sprinkled in, pretty good. "New" AMSL will probably become what her detractors have called her from the start.
2. Unless he grows a conscience and angers Monaghan, he looks good as gold.
3. When Hell freezes over.
4. When Hell freezes over. AFAIK, the ABA doesn't have that sort of authori-tay.
If Monaghan is mercifully run over by an errant Greyhound, everything changes, of course.
Professor Sonne was wearing a red bowtie yesterday. Made me want to puke. He is a disgrace. This blood is on that squirmy little weasel's hands too.
And by the way, the op-ed he wrote for the Detroit News last week sucked. Wow, great thesis: Michael Vick is a bad role model. WHOA! Never considered it that way, Sonne! How enlightening. THAT'S the stuff Monaghan Tenure is made of!
How does Sonne even decide to write something like that? Sitting around watching SportsCenter and calls up the Detroit News and is like "I'm a newly tenured professor of law with a pedestrian knowledge of sports, can I write something innocuous about Michael Vick for you?" Or more hilariously, did Sonne actually feel strongly enough about the topic and intellectually invested enough in it to sit down and genuinely craft what he thought was a meaningful piece?!! HAHAHAHAA what a loser. Get a life.
If Monaghan is mercifully run over by an errant Greyhound, everything changes, of course.
albert anon | 08.30.07 - 9:18 am | #
--------------------------------------------------
------
Are you wishing death on the man? That seems a bit excessive even for Fumare.
Just reading...,
al anon can speak for himself, but in my opinion you have asked a stupid question. Read al anon's comment again. He nowhere wishes death on the man. He observes that if Monaghan were to be run over by a Greyhound it would (1) be merciful and (2) change everything.
Your dumbassedness seems a bit excessive, even for a Dobranski shill.
What is telling is that during the summer of 2006 I asked Prof. Safranek what Prof. Sonne's game was. His reply was simply that Prof. Sonne had a different idea of authority and that he saw things differently. No personal attack, no character assasination, no ill-motives imputed; rather a classy answer which did not stoop to the tactics with which Prof. Safranek was already being attacked. I must admit that I have lost alot of respect for Prof. Sonne over his silence in this entire matter.
Thank you.
Have to agree with Fargo.
I actually spoke with Sonne and that is the same idea I got from him, that he just sees the whole situation of authority differently. I definately don't agree with him, though.
And while I wish he would speak up over the wrongs being committed against Safranek, Lyons and Pucillo, the ad hominem attacks need to stop. Prof. Sonne, I believe is wrong, but he is still a good man.
I think quite a few people on this site, on both sides, needs a serious examination of conscience.
"I actually spoke with Sonne and that is the same idea I got from him, that he just sees the whole situation of authority differently."
What exactly is his understanding of authority, then? Is it simply that, "Tom Monaghan (or Bernie Dobranski) says, and I do." That can't be right. Far from being a priest who answers to a bishop, or a soldier accountable to a superior officer, he's an academic who is supposed to be exercising independent judgment, even on matters of educational policy. And he certainly has an obligation to make a fuss if the dean is acting unethically, which is abundantly clear.
I'm not trying to justify what Sonne is saying about authority or go into great detalil about his philosophy of detail, as above, I think he is wrong. My overall point is that he is a decent man and doesn't need to be trashed, just as Safranek doesn't deserve to be.
Why does everyone keep making excuses for Milhizer, Sonne, Adophe and Quirk. They are silent witnesses, cooperators and beneficiaries of all the injustice at AMSL and the slaughter of the faculty.
Being a professor at AMSL was supposed to be more than posting powerpoints and smiling. It's about being a role model and standing up for truth and taking a place in faculty governance as a lay Catholic should do.
Theyh have a different view of authority? Adolf Hitler and Joseph Stalin had a different view of authority. What a bunch of crap. Their cowards and conformists. Don't try and rehabiliate them unless you've got some better ground to do so.
Milhizer's got his tenure and 30k raise for being Asso. Dean, Falvey lost the cash and will probaby be fired Sonne and Adophe got tenure. Pucillo and Lyons were denied. And Quirk, even though he went up for tenure and was shot down by the faculty for having no meaningful publications, apparently doesn't get the boot like Pucillo and Lyons but gets a second bite at the apple. Enough with excuses for them. There on the dark side even if they pretend to be neutral.
They don't publically defend the Dean; They don't defend the "dissident faculty." They are a bunch of nothings. "But since you are lukewarm and not hot or cold, I'm going to spit you out of my mouth." Rev. 3:16.
Funny that Sonne can talk a lot about heroes, he just can't actually recognize any.
"on authority" not "of detail"
What's funny is that Safranek (who has actually talked with Sonne on these issues, I'm guessing most people here haven't) isn't willing to trash Sonne, but all of you don't think twice about it.
"And Quirk, even though he went up for tenure and was shot down by the faculty for having no meaningful publications, apparently doesn't get the boot like Pucillo and Lyons but gets a second bite at the apple."
This is a very serious statement, Oriens. How do we know that Quirk was up for tenure? And how do we know that the faculty shot him down? Was this reported by the dean at the recent town hall meeting? I thought that the dean was dodging all of those thorny tenure-related issues by invoking the old "personnel matter" crap.
Just reading...
We were, after all, trained well by the fired and soon-to-be-fired faculty. Fumare readers know that nothing would please Dean Doober more than one of them transmitting a threat on this forum. If it happens, it will be a shill for the Dean trying to sully this band of brothers, perhaps his own secretary since she's evidently been useful to him in this department before.
The cool thing is that no threats are necessary. Mssrs. Dobranski and Monaghan need only to borrow a copy of the Bible to know how their story ends. I can see it now... "eye of a needle...eye of a needle???"
These men know, deep down in places they don't talk about at parties, what is in store for them once they shuffle off this mortal coil.
No threats are necessary, Just Reading.
Enough of this senseless lashing out. Here is what we all know about Jim Sonne:
1) He is a top notch law professor who has kept a low profile in this mess.
That's it. If anybody wants to draw a conclusion from his posture to the effect that he is deluded, afraid, or even complicit in the Dean's actions, go ahead and draw that conclusion, and I would maybe share it to some extent. But you all need to heed Professor Rice's example and judge the actions, not the man. If there is no love in your heart for Professor Sonne then by ripping him apart here you imperil yourself and anyone else you might excite into doing the same. Get a hold of yourselves and cut it out.
Nobody agrees with you more about the ignominy of what has happened to Professor Safranek than I do. But this kind of hateful speech is beneath us if we are to consider ourselves as standing up for what is right.
No threats are necessary, Just Reading.
Gavroche | 08.30.07 - 10:43 am | #
----------
I did not see it as a threat. It didn't even cross my mind. I apologize if I misunderstood Albert's words.
We know one more thing about Sonne: he recently took and passed the Florida bar, presumably because he wants to be a part of AMSL in Florida. Oh, wait, my mistake. He recently took and passed the CA bar. Hmmm.
I, and some others, also know more about Sonne. Nothing too sinister, but I do know that he would run to the Dean after faculty meetings to narc his colleagues out.
It's not just silence on his part. He's chosen his side and he's acted accordingly.
The situation is a little different with Professors Adolphe and Quirk...they have immigration considerations that are different than those of Sonne and Milhizer. I'm not sure of the exact status of their visas, but perhaps their working for this particular school is tied up with it.
Then again, Sonne and Milhizer have families whose livelihood would be threatened by speaking up. (Yes, I know that the other faculty members involved also have families (pretty large families, too), but I want to toss it out there as what might be going on in their thought processes.)
I'm not excusing any of them, but I think we do have other factors to consider here that may explain why they're remaining silent rather than assuming they're purely evil, which sometimes posters seem to do.
In the end, yes, we all know what happened in the statement by Pastor Niemuller: Then they came for me, and by then there was no one left to speak up for me. We believe they should speak up...they may believe there's a value by staying silent. I just wish we could hear THEIR side of the story (other than "my boss says")...there might be something more there from their POV we just don't know.
1. As long as Tom Monaghan wants to fund a law school and has the dough to make it happen, there will be an AMSL.
2. As long as Tom Monaghan thinks his dean is doing a good job.
3. Probably not, although perhaps one may return as "Law Scholar in Residence"
4. As long as the AMSL produces grads who pass the bar, the ABA will steer clear of getting involved in this mess.
Insider, I'm not saying these things aren't true, and I assume by your name that you know better than I do. There are legitimate conclusions that can be drawn from the sorts of facts you are citing. I'm not a big "tone it down" guy at all, quite the opposite, but I am simply saying that we can and must do much better than some of the recently posted venom.
There's nothing good to be said about standing around watching injustices like the Dean's marshaling of this ridiculous complaint to achieve a political hatchet job on somebody. But there are petty ways to talk about what's wrong with it, and there are better ways. Cool heads prevail.
Sonne is a rascally narc (thanks Insider for reminding us of this) who is doing ANYTHING BUT passively sitting on the sidelines and quietly going about his business.
He is fully complicit and has more than his fair share of objectively evil acts throughout this whole mess. He knows his in his heart. He is not stupid. He knows exactly what he's doing and the implications for his soul. That's the sad thing about Sonne. He knows better, which is probably more than can be said for your Adolphes of the world and the batch of new professors.
Where has AM been?
I think a reasonable action would be to present Dean Dobranski with a printed copy of the online alumni petition in some suitable venue - perhaps at the upcoming meeting of the Fellowship of Catholic Scholars. Invite the press.
Sonne = Coward,
"He is fully complicit and has more than his fair share of objectively evil acts."
And these are, and you know they are objectively evile, because? Enlighten us.
It is a free forum and if you want to trash Sonne, have at it. I don't agree with what his stance seems to be, however, I thought he was a very good professor. I don't pretend to know much more than that as I didn't make it a point to get to know my professors. All I know is that his classroom decorum was very professional. I cannot say that for some of the others mentioned in the various comments, especially Adolphe. That is my two cents.
"Brian Leiter's Law School Reports" just posted a link to the intimidation story (no comment, just a link).
http://leiterlawschool.typepad.c...pad.com/leiter/
Here's ALL I need to know about Sonne: He has not signed the petition, he has not resigned in disgrace and atonement over his role in Dean Dobranski's smearing of Safranek's good name, he has not even went to Dobranski to privately inquire why Safranek would be treated this way, he HAS helped Dobranski build these "cases" against Pucillo, Lyons, Safranek, etc., and he has not personally apologized to Safranek's 7 children for aiding what has been done to them and their father.
That's all I need to know about this "top-notch law professor who has kept a low profile." With all due respect to commenter Rossettie above, Sonne may be a top-notch professor but he is a low-down guttersnipe of a human being.
"1. As long as Tom Monaghan wants to fund a law school and has the dough to make it happen, there will be an AMSL.
2. As long as Tom Monaghan thinks his dean is doing a good job.
3. Probably not, although perhaps one may return as "Law Scholar in Residence"
4. As long as the AMSL produces grads who pass the bar, the ABA will steer clear of getting involved in this mess."
I agree with you on 1, 2, and 3, Clarence. But your assertion in 4 makes no sense.
The ABA, thanks be to God, IS involved in this mess. It has had any number of opportunities NOT to be involved in this mess. It could have dismissed the faculty's report, but instead it asked for a response from the administration. It then could have dismissed the faculty's report after accepting the administration's response, but instead it sent Professor Butterfoss in to investigate. After considering the Butterfoss report, it again had a chance to clear the administration and move on. But it instead has chosen to ask for additional information. And despite the dean's statement from last Friday (and Incense's bogus interpretation thereof, there is no indication that any aspect of the faculty's report has been rejected on the merits.
So like it or not, the ABA is very much immersed in this mess. And there's no indication that it is going away any time soon.
Veritas, How could I dispute the merits what you're saying? I don't even want to. If the low profile is a facade, it's our job to not be fooled and it's for God to decide who's a guttersnipe.
That said, I'm done for the day. I'm sorry if I've done more to incite this Sonne thread than to show the error in it.
Rossettie,
I don't think disgusting remarks have been made about Sonne. They are reaonable remarks about his conduct. This of course does not judge his soul.
But how in the world can you be morally satisfied with a faculty member just "laying low" under the present circumstances. Sometimes life calls for a response as a matter of justice. You don't have a choice to lie low.
I would appreciate it if you could respond. I am honestly curious about this point.
Sincerely,
OexA.
OexA, I wholeheartedly agree with you that the present circumstances call for a response. I agree that silence in the face of all this is reprehensible. It is not my business to excuse anyone for their acts or omissions. Sonne is a big boy who can take care of himself.
But I have no hatred for him or for Dobranski or for Monaghan. I love all those guys. Do they hate me? Maybe they do, and I bet I'll find out before I graduate. But all I know is that they are dead wrong in what they are doing, and it's long past time for Sonne to do what's right and for Dobranski to resign and for Monaghan to relinquish his deathgrip on AMSL. I wish it weren't so, for their sakes, and I hope that satisfies your curiosity.
Wait, hold it--Sonne's being called a coward and a guttersnipe by people who have to hide behind screen names so they don't get in trouble?
Unlike, say, the professors they claim to support--Pucillo, Lyons, Safranek, etc. While these excellent professors did an admirable job of teaching their respective subjects, their courage is apparently (and regrettably) something that can't be taught.
jtcorey -- "Guttersnipe" and "coward" are matters of opinion, really. Mean and nasty, but still just an opinion. What I'd like to know is how these various people seem to know what Sonne says behind closed doors to the Dean, labeling him a "snitch". What is the source of the information?
As for Anonymity=cowardice, you really think that "they" don't know who most of us are by now? It isn't that hard to figure out. At least, not for those of us not swapping monikers every 5 seconds. The anonymity's just a pointless toy.
I'm an insider, and I know that Joe, at Dobranski's command, rooted through Safranek's trash looking for Papa Johns pizza boxes. For shame! Of course, he is too cowardly to admit this.
Sorry, albert, but if it were pointless, it wouldn't be happening. The administration might have a couple of good ideas about people who are blogging, but I'd guess that they could only be sure of who a handful of the names are. Even then, they'd be guessing.
When students and alumni start putting their own names to statements like "Sonne's a coward," then I'll agree with you.
I am not sure how lashing out at Sonne continually is going to help anything...if anything, it makes you all look more unstable rather than rational about this mess. If nothing else, there are alot of other profs (clinical profs, current profs, lecturers, new profs, etc.) who likewise have not done anything public, so why you are targeting Sonne is beyond me. And, I might point out, I don't think anyone posting here knows what is going on behind the scenes... for all you know, many of these otherwise quiet-in-the-public figures might be lobbying in the private.
Prof. Sonne is a very good professor, and I think highly undeserving of this.
Secret admirer at 1:12--I was actually looking for deposit bottles, being a little low on cash. Several other people in the neighborhood saw me doing the same through their trash cans, you can check.
2L--as far as what good comes of attacking Sonne, beats me. I outgrew getting any pleasure out of insulting people I can't hurt years ago. And I second your comments on his character.
Free Mike Vick.
you guys wanna get high?
I was Sonne's assistant and found him to be a very devout Catholic, extremely intelligent professor, and I cared deeply about him. That being said - when the subject of a union surfaced amidst the staff, I went to him since he was after all, "my professor." I went to him to ask information about unions because this is his "subject." As soon as I left his office he went and informed the dean of my questions and interest. To his credit he returned and admitted it to me. This did nothing to redeem his disloyalty as far as I was concerned.
I still consider him a good human being and excellent professor, but now hear this JTC - I think he has picked his side and I have no respect for that decision. Plus, I believe his running to BD about this and numerous other things - makes him a coward in my eyes.
Just my opinion.
"As soon as I left his office he went and informed the dean of my questions and interest."
This is unbelievable! I would really be paranoid in a place like that.
"I went to him to ask information about unions because this is his "subject.""
Would a duty of confidentiality not have attached to this discussion? Even though Sharon sought information rather than representation, it seems to me that one in her position would have reasonably expected the discussion to be kept confidential. And it surely sounds as if Sharon subjectively understood that the discussion would be kept confidential.
Cheers, Sharon.
I agree that he's picked his side--that, at least, is what I've been able to determine from my own inquiry. And I disagree with his choice, as you do.
I don't agree with you that his actions towards you translate as 'cowardice,' however, any more than I would say he was 'treacherous' to the dean if he hadn't said anything about the conversation. Furthermore--I admit this is a subjective definition--but telling you that he had done so doesn't strike me as something a coward would do. While disagreeing with him, I therefore still have respect for him--just as I respect you for being one of the few individuals these past several months who puts your own name to your statements.
In re: Maj. Gen. John T. Coyne, USMCR (Ret.): E-mail him at his law firm, Jordan Coyne & Savits, L.L.P., at jcoyne@jocs-law.com or j.coyne@jocs-law.com.
Rossettie said, "1) He is a top notch law professor who has kept a low profile in this mess."
Top notch is a stretch. He's a young law professor with a lot to learn and, although he teaches just fine, he's yet to reach the abilities of those professors who find themselves out on their ears. Pucillo, with a similar amount of experience, for instance, is quite a ways in front of Sonne in teaching ability and contribution to the welfare of students in the clerkship realm, which makes the tenure situation even more dubious. Nothing againt Sonne, but he's not a top-tier professor yet. Maybe someday, but not now for sure.
I also believe that silence when the facts are very plain is different than not wanting to speak out on every little controversial issue. Sometimes a low profile is warranted, sometimes it is to lend credibility to the injustice. Here, not speaking up and not creating a silent protest by leaving is worthy of criticism. The facts can no longer be denied such that a person can remain neutral in this mess. It's just not possible any more. Ignorance is no excuse either, when you can simply find out what is really going on and act in protest of it.
jcoyne@jocs-law.com
called his old firm...
crud- you beat me to it. so much for my crowning bask in email contacts glory
*small tear*
Thanks, vebn and anonymous.
I like Sonne.
Lawdog,
Fine and dandy--but again, such allegations would smell a lot less sanctimonious coming from people who are willing to say who they are. I'm big on the whole "right to confront one's accusers" thing, and yeah, yeah, I know, we're not in court--as I've said before, courts have some rules of decorum, for one thing--but I don't think it's too much to at least let someone know who you are when you accuse them, even if a direct confrontation is impractical.
I'm not into outing people from behind their screen names. Probably because no one's offered me the right price. But I'll ask you...are you willing to make the statement you just made, using your own name? Can you make the stand you've made without using a screen name, and get away from the whole 'plausible deniability' bit that some of the more regular commenters here are apparently desperate to hang on to?
(Without the backing of two hundred-plus other people whose names are on the same statement, I mean...)
""1. As long as Tom Monaghan wants to fund a law school and has the dough to make it happen, there will be an AMSL.
2. As long as Tom Monaghan thinks his dean is doing a good job.
3. Probably not, although perhaps one may return as "Law Scholar in Residence"
4. As long as the AMSL produces grads who pass the bar, the ABA will steer clear of getting involved in this mess."
I agree with you on 1, 2, and 3, Clarence. But your assertion in 4 makes no sense.
The ABA, thanks be to God, IS involved in this mess."
Thank you, Anonymous, for your comments, as well as the discipline to stay on topic -- we appear to be in the minority here on this thread.
I do agree that the ABA is marginally involved, but I still assert that when all is said and done we've probably already seen the maximum intrusion into the school's internal affairs. The revocation of accreditation or moving to probationary status of a law school for internal matters appears unprecedented -- the only cases that I'm aware of with such sanction involve the production of a large proportion of graduates who can't pass the bar exam. This is clearly not the case at AMSL.
Until recently, the Dean had a exemplary and untarnished record and reputation in the legal education community - this sets AMSL apart from other law schools that have received ABA accreditation sanction. I'm sure his reputation still has value, even if the ABA committee might have a problem with the school's inclusion of faculty in governance and the treatment of some faculty. The ABA's number one objective is to ensure students receive a good legal education and become competent lawyers. This is not the first time a law school faculty has had a bitter disagreement over governace with their administration, and I imagine that the ABA does not see itself largely as an instrument to assert faculty rights, especially since so many on the ABA committee are administrators themselves. Getting further involved in the midst of a spat between adminstration and law school faculty would appear rather unattractive to the ABA, primarily because this is all noise if the school continues to train competent attorneys. The ABA may conclude that whatever issues exist would be best handled in the enforcement of faculty employment contracts and/or collective bargaining and not penalizing the entire school community with accreditation sanction.
Probably not the response most on this board want to hear, but I think that's the way things will work out. We'll all see soon enough.
plus, Clarence, we know that the ABA doesn't mind being told one thing and poeple doing another so it doesn't really care about the fact that it accredited a law school in Michigan that showed financial independance/feasability in Michigan.
Jt-
I'd tell Sonne to his face that he's got a lot to learn about being a professor, and that it's a shame he's not being more public about what is happening to his betters around him. I have no problem doing that, and if I see him, I'll avail myself of the opportunity. I see no connection between that willingness and ascribing my actual name to it on the blog.
I also have been very public about my disagreement with almost everything negative the administration has done to our school over the last 2 years, and am not one who can be accused of hiding behind a screen name to say so. You don't have to believe me, but most everything I've said here, I've said to those who are responsible in many many forms without shrinking from using my own name. Again, there's no reason for me to "reveal my identity" in order to make my comments legitimate, except to satisfy those who have not made the connection yet. I don't really care about that aspect of it, however.
yeah, I don't think federal judges need to be putting their name on blog posts.
Don't you mean Supreme Court Justices?
"(Without the backing of two hundred-plus other people whose names are on the same statement, I mean...)"
Joe,
I hope you're not denigrating the petition, which you and I both signed (with our real names), as a cowardly safety-in-numbers act. "Thank you for your courage" jibes notwithstanding, everyone who signed that petition took a public stand (possibly googlable) on a controversial issue. Current students, faculty, and staff are particularly to be commended for their, yes, courage. Also, very few alumni have settled into permanent, career-long positions and the staff who have left obviously are in a transitional status in their careers.
As to Sonne, I am disappointed in his failure to speak out and I am disgusted with his cooperation with and facilitation of Dobranki's uncharitable (despicable, really) tactics.
I am also very interested in why he took the CA bar. Sonne has not been neutral, he has acted to further the dissolution of my alma mater and the transfer of her assets to a separate project, with a different mission, in Florida. I shall be very angry if, in the event that the law school "moves" to Florida, he does not go with it. I'll want to know why AMT, Florida is good enough for (the remains of) my alma mater, but not good enough for him.
You, Professor Sonne, and anyone else is welcome to email me at firstnamedotlastname at gmail. I'd welcome the correspondence. Dobranski doesn't respond to my emails (sent under my own name) anymore, despite my cheery greetings of "Good Morning!" Perhaps he's intimidated?
Clarence,
I agree that revocation of accreditation is unlikely. But I wouldn't rule out probation so quickly, especially given the dean's recent acknowledgement that the ABA is actively pursuing allegations regarding faculty retention. If probation would be, as you suggest, an "unprecedented" sanction, it might be warranted here because this is an unprecedented situation in the history of American law schools. Since when has a law school with full accreditation suffered a negative change in status with regard to almost half of its faculty in a single summer.
Think about it. At the close of this past spring semester:
1) Kevin Lee was a tenure-track member of the faculty, but he has left for Campbell.
2) Bridgette Carr was tenure-track member of the faculty, but she has left for Notre Dame.
3) Lee Strang was a tenure-track member of the faculty, but he is now on leave and visiting at Michigan State (with his return unlikely).
4) Elizabeth Kirk was a tenure-track member of the faculty who had been on leave, but she has now resigned.
5) Robert Bork was a tenured member of the faculty, but he is now on leave (with his return unlikely).
6) Steve Safranek was a tenured member of the faculty, but he is now suspended (with his removal imminent).
7) Ed Lyons was a tenure-track member of the faculty, but he is now on leave (with no chance of return).
Phil Pucillo was a tenure-track member of the faculty, but he is now on leave (with no chance of return).
9) Howard Bromberg was promoted to Assistant Dean of Clinical and Professional Skills, but then resigned from that position, and is now splitting his teaching between AMSL and Michigan (and a full departure for Michigan is in the works, from what I hear).
And this is just the tenured and tenure-track faculty. It doesn't account for Lesa Byrnes, who was the Director of the RWA program but now has left for Toledo. Nor does it account for Stephanie Crino, was an RWA instructor but now has left for Michigan State.
Under the circumstances, the onus is on AMSL to explain to the ABA why this has happened. As you note, the ABA's number one objective is to ensure students receive a good legal education and become competent lawyers. But let's not fool ourselves into thinking that this drastic loss of faculty and RWA instructors has not compromised AMSL's educational program.
The situation is extraordinary, and the whole world of legal academia is watching. The ABA will do something extraordinary, both because extraordinary action is warranted and because they don't want to be reduced to a paper tiger. Especially by a guy who, in order to secure full accreditation, made financial promises that he obviously had no intention of keeping.
lawdog,
As you're known to me (unless separate people led me astray with the same information), you don't need to convince me of your own stance.
If and when you get the opportunity to have said conversation with Sonne, let me know how it goes. I believe that you'd make tell him exactly what you say you would, although I have a feeling that you'd couch it in more civil terms--I've noticed that people aren't as quite as fiery in declaring their beliefs in the face of opposition, especially when the opposition is responding politely, as I suspect Professor Sonne would.
"No reason to reveal your identity." Right. That's a nice way of not acknowledging that there's no reason not to reveal it. I think a reasonable person could impute it to cowardice of some kind--which I don't believe you to have, by the way. I never saw it in the person I believe I'm addressing before, and don't think that's the case now.
Cheers, Charles.
Were you to blog under any name, I think that (like lawdog) you wouldn't say anything that you wouldn't say under your own name.
I seem to now be caught in a loop of answering individual posts one on one, so I'll quit for a bit and check in later. If there's anything left for me to say or respond to, I'll do it then.
Thanks Jt. Yeah, I don't believe there is any cowardice involved in my decision not to sign my name to things on the blog. Pseudonyms actually have a very useful and important history. Were the founding fathers cowards because they refused to sign their own names to a number of different writings? I don't think so.
I do think that, overall, blogs with pseudonymed authors actually benefit from removing preconceived notions about individuals from the substance of the posts. For instance, as a hypothetical, let's say you know and dislike John Smith. John writes a post on a blog. I suspect you will read his post with that idea of him in your mind. Some folks would probably be surprised that people they disliked personally make good points when stripped of the personal feelings. It's the same thing with submitting exams with numbers rather than names. I think it has a legitimate purpose, and a blog should be about the argument and not the arguer, for the most part. I am not usually an uncivil person on here or in person, so I am pretty ok with where things stand, though I understand the value of what you are saying. I don't think there's a "right" way, but there are certainly plenty of legitimate reasons for using pseudonyms.
My real name is on my AMSoL diploma. That's punishment enough, I think.
Is it a license to attack pseudonymously the bastards who are destroying our school? I'd have to say yes.
My involvement with ABA accreditation has been from the standpoint of central administration negotiating with a unified ABA/law school dean, with the latter typically arguing for more financial independence and faculty governance than the institution (central administration) was already providing. I've been through this process with a Tier 1 (top 25) law school and a 2nd tier school, and the ABA/dean were singing from a common script in both cases.
I can tell you plainly, if the ABA lets all this nonsense at AMSL proceed unchallenged, the next time I hear that argument come out of a law school dean I'm going to laugh in his or her face. AMSL will establish a new (low) threshold of allowable behaviors and structures. The AMSL case will have further established that once a commitment is made to the ABA the institution can proceed to ignore that commitment entirely, or even declare its representations to the ABA to be in error (as AMSL has done with its long term financial plan).
Similarly while no institution with which I've been affiliated would let charges like those leveled again Safranek get as far as a written reprimand, let alone suspension, if the ABA allows that too to go unchallenged they relegate themselves to irrelevancy as far as the protection of law school faculty are concerned.
The commenter above is correct - there are many eyes in higher education watching to see what the ABA does in this case, and whatever they do (or don't do), we'll remember well the next time we're talking accreditation or faculty complaints with them.
Prof. Sonne does not need to be dragged into this... he is just there to do his job... teach CivPro. No more, no less.
Maybe he is just trying staying out of all the politics, which nobody can blame him for trying. But, sometimes, there is no middle ground; however hard one might try to find it.
All I can say is that he is a good man, professor, and it was a pleasure to learn from him.
Here's some new fodder to chew on:
"AMSL Weathers Critics, Moves Forward, Says Dean"
http://www.cnsnews.com/
ViewNatio...T20070830a.html
Don't forget to bring a towel! That's what Towelie always says.
If the ABA doesn't care that the resources of AMSOL are controlled by an outside foundation rather than the board/school then who does? Is it the State of Michigan who cares about fraudulent fundraising for a school that has no control of it's resources and is willing to give them to a separate entity? In holding the board to task for lack of performance of their fiduciary responsibilities - will someone care that they have no control whatsoever of the college when it comes to resources and no control over an "executive committee" making decisions before their meetings?
Amazing,
How far will you take your logic? I cannot judge the soul, but I am entitled to evaluate actions (as we all are). So, how can a person sit silently by and not either speak up or leave the situation (worse here in that he's got an informant role apparently on certain subjects to the Dean)? At some point isn't the injustice sufficient to require action or removal from complicity? If not, what is the limit of what you'd permit to go on in front of you just so you don't rock the boat? No job is worth the price at some point, is it?
I certainly don't know details... certainly I believe there is a time when there is no "middle ground" as I hinted at in my post. But I can sympathize with a person who is trying to raise a family in a peaceful setting, who doesn't want to be caught up in the blood-letting that is happening. I agree: the question is "At what point does flying under the radar become cowardice?" Now I am becoming that which I was trying to criticize: one who admits not to know the details of the situation and yet still posts anonymous commentary claiming to state something worth mentioning. I apologize. But I think there is a place for a person who just wants to teach class and go home to his family, and not have to stand up, when there are so many others already willing to stand.
Sonne isn't just doing his professorial job (unlike, say, Bromberg, from what I hear). He has taken an active role in Dobranski's purge.
Here's some new fodder to chew on:
"AMSL Weathers Critics, Moves Forward, Says Dean"
http://www.cnsnews.com/ ViewNatio...T20070830a.html
Miklos Molnar | 08.30.07 - 3:55 pm | #
----
Just read this piece...... be advised you should have a barf bag handy.
Dean Bernard Dobranski..... not only are you deceitful..... you lie. You need to be touched with either a serious dose of reality, or a 2x4 up side the head.
This piece needs to have an appropriate response. It will probably generate 200 posts here, and fumare might consider making it a separate item.
The strange part is that doober did not wait until 5pm Friday of a holiday weekend to spread this crap.
Maybe something better is coming then.
I'd like to also suggest that this "cnsnews" piece be considered a new thread. There's just too much here to pick apart.
BTW, "cnsnews" is Brent Bozell.
Who wants to be that Deano had a healthy say in the questions as well as the answers?
Newbier said: "You need to be touched with either a serious dose of reality.."
Is being "touched" by Reality in an uninvited and intimidating manner cause for dismissing Reality?
"But I think there is a place for a person who just wants to teach class and go home to his family, and not have to stand up, when there are so many others already willing to stand."
That place is no longer AMSL under this administration, unfortunately. They've created conditions that make what you suggest impossible.
the CNSNews story was written by Robert Falls Public Relations, and should say "this is a paid advertisement"
I like it when I can write my own questions and answers. It's a lot more fun that way.
"He is the chairman of our board. His major contribution is to decide how much the Ave Maria Foundation grant will be."
And that little statement deserved some follow-up. Is this not a conflict of interest Brent? And is this not a position of undue influence? Where are the hard questions Brent? This was as tightly correographed a little Q & A as I have ever seen. And...BTW Brent Bozell is part of the TSM OkeeDokee-Corral and has been for many All part of the same inbread group.
doobie knows that a liar, I mean lawyer only asks the questions he already knows the answers to.
Is being "touched" by Reality in an uninvited and intimidating manner cause for dismissing Reality?
Miklos Molnar | 08.30.07 - 4:24 pm | #
-------
hehehe.....
and if he is touched in the forest by the uncut 2x4 when no one is around...... will anyone hear the "splat"
My guess is that O'Beirne set up the cns puff-piece with Dobranski. And another group (Bozell's Media Research Center) that I once respected is tainted by Monaghan. (Is he a contributor?)
Why bother to frame it as an interview? "Is it fair to say that the Ave Maria School of Law and all it provides - jobs for faculty and administration, scholarships for students, and a top-notch law education - would not exist were it not for Tom Monaghan?" That's not even a softball. This raises legitimate concerns about CNS (and MRC)'s journalistic integrity (and competence). Contact with T$M enterprises injures another cultural warrior on our side.
This is just great!
http://www.google.com/search?
hl=...bozell+monaghan
10 pages of hits.
Ever wonder why conservative Catholics aren't supporting us? Monaghan has given money to everyone.
Is cns reporter kate Monaghan any relation?
Boko, there's a new CNS post and thread upstairs. This thread can get back to bashing Sonne, that coward.
First post here ever! but no, Kate Monaghan is a personal friend, and no relation to Tom Monaghan.
Good to you 'round here MA, unless you're just another Boko phantom.. There are so many I can't hardly keep them straight! =)
I wondered the same thing about the Kate Monaghan Boko. Glad to hear there's no affiliation. I did turn up one interesting factoid about Brent Bozell being campaign coordinator for Pat Buchanan back in '92 of thereabout, and Monaghan being on his advisory committee in '96. Coincidence? I dunno.
http://findarticles.com/p/articl...v12/
ai_18072668
On a related note (and to respond to jtcorey as well) I'm glad I've only got one persona to worry about and absolutely NO ONE has remotely guessed who I am. Frankly, I am a massive pussy, just like Sonne, who has never, ever attached his name to anythign negative about Deany B, Monkeyhands, Florida, or nothin' else.
Seriously, all you people who have ever guessed, even in person, I have lied to. "I" am actually a pan-global alliance of Russian, German, and Dutch academics. Or just another Boko phantom toy. But I'm guessing about his phantoms too.
"Good to see you" .. that is. I'm the king of typos... Egad.
DC probably beats the hell out of the frozen backwaters of Michigan. Grrr... No wonder you're so literate and typographically unchallenged.
Yeah, I saw that Monaghan, Bozell, Buchanan connection. My association with AMSoL, coupled with my unwillingness to support Dobranski's terror tactics and Monaghan's craziness, seems to have shut as many doors on the right as on the left. Why did I go there again?
Isn't Patrick J. Conlin's email conlin@keuschlaw.com? Or is that another Patrick J. Conlin who lives in Washtenaw County?
As for the address, couldn't it be this one:
Keusch, Flintoft & Conlin
P. O. Box 187
Chelsea, MI 48118
Seemed like a good idea at the time? Beats me. I did it too. But I made a new diploma out of crayons and markers, so those doors haven't been closed to me. That crazy shit fools everyone. Because, you know, I take my diploma to all my job interviews.
Home phone for Mrs. Cathy Cleaver Ruse in Arlington, Virginia: [deleted]
[Edited by Thales. I've decided to edit Mrs. Cathy Cleaver Ruse's home phone number, for courtesy's sake. If someone has an email and/or work number, please comment.]
I think that the lawyer at Keusch, Flintoft, and Conlin is his son, Patrick Jr.. Judge Conlin is reportedly a long time "friend" of Tom's.
"Under the circumstances, the onus is on AMSL to explain to the ABA why this has happened. As you note, the ABA's number one objective is to ensure students receive a good legal education and become competent lawyers. But let's not fool ourselves into thinking that this drastic loss of faculty and RWA instructors has not compromised AMSL's educational program."
Anonymous,
Excellent points. I assume you are a graduate of or student at AMSL and therefore have very high standards concerning legal education. I'm afraid the ABA committee may not be using the same standards, nor do I think the committee is really interested in why faculty are leaving as much as the competency of the faculty who remain and those being hired as replacements.
Yes, the drastic loss of faculty and instructors may have compromised the educational program at AMSL, and yes, the replacements may be of lesser quality than those leaving. The replacements and holdover faculty may be all weanies and dirtbags. However, can the Dean demonstrate that he can keep a faculty that can teach the law at least as well as Florida Costal, Florida International, Cooley, UNLV, Pace, Pepperdine, etc.? Can he prepare his graduates to pass the bar at high enough rates to avoid the problems at Whittier and Golden Gate? Absolutely -- AM Foundation money will ensure AMSL will hire plenty of at least minimally competent and experienced law school faculty and offer hefty tuition discounts to enough bright students to ensure a high bar pass rate.
I know that most readers of this blog shudder or perhap wretch to think of the law schools I've mentioned as comparitors to AMSL and its stated mission to be a different kind of law school, but that's exactly how the ABA committee looks at it. Sorry, but the ABA accreditation standards are exactly the same for Whittier and Golden Gate as they are for Stanford, Yale, Harvard, Michigan, Notre Dame, and AMSL.
Try cathyruse@gmail.com for an e-mail address for Mrs. Cathy Cleaver Ruse.
Clarence,
You seem to be operating under the assumption that poor performance on the bar exam is the only basis upon which the ABA would put a school on probation. Perhaps this is because Whittier and Golden Gate, which are the only schools currently on probation (for those interested in this discussion, use the link below for the ABA web page on accredited law schools), are on probation because of poor bar exam performance.
But by no means does that suggest that there can be no other basis for probation. I would suggest that AMSL's loss of almost half of its faculty over the summer, combined with a loss of apparently 20% of the incoming second-year class, make it a great case for probation. After all, the bulk of the people leaving are leaving because of the poisonous environment that exists. And the environment is something that the ABA cares about, hence the existence of Standard 405.
http://www.abanet.org/legaled/ap...s/
approved.html
Clarence Thomas -- But as I seem to recall it, the ABA was rather concerned with the school's ability to achieve financial independence. There were specific questions from the ABA regarding the independence from and potential for control by Monaghan. That, at least, according to Dobranski when I signed up at that stinking cesspit of a school. Why did I find this pertinent at the time? I had many of the same concerns. I didn't want to go to some two-bit Bob Jones or Pat Robertson "religious nutjob" university that is basically the proprietary property of its crackpot founder.
Unfortunatelty, that, as it turned out, is precisely where I wound up. My guess is that the ABA doesn't care for that either. But my second guess is that losing accreditation is much more difficult that obtaining it in the first place. Once you're in the club, you've got to kick the boss in the teeth and call his mother a whore before they kick you out.
Back in the day, at least, the assurances were always quick to come that this wasn't Tom's project. Tom was just "writing checks" to keep it going. Obviously, that has now changed. Accreditation changed everything, and not for the better.
But perhaps I'm just being overly nostalgic for the days of yore. After all... I do have the Greatest 100 Alternative Hits of the 90s on the Zen right now with Alanis blaring out.. "I'm here to remind you // of the mess you left when you went away // It's not fair, to deny me // of the cross I bear that you gave to me //you, you, you oughtta know."
Strangely appropriate.
[And I'm still this coherent three or four beers in? Wowzerinos! See what you do to me Bernie? It's a damn THURSDAY and near half past eleven and I'm still drinking cheap beer to forget you and your dirty AMSL whore, you lying, scumsucking jackanapes].
Postal addresses and phone numbers for the BOG folks would be great too. I did a search for them all and found something for each of them. Maybe a few phone calls requesting to visit to their offices would be helpful or at the very least annoying to them. Still think a little Michael Moore action would be nice. Youtube it.
Anonymous,
You are correct re: my assumption about poor student performance on the bar exam as the primary basis for probation. I make that assumption because in researching the ABA's 84 year history of law school accreditation they've never put a school on probation for anything else, nor have they revoked the accreditation of of a school unless the school voluntarily closed.
Again, we'll see soon enough.
Clarence,
If it is the case (and I have no reason to challenge your research) that probation has been imposed for no reason other than poor bar-exam performance, I think that the explanation is simple: any other conceivable basis for probation can be remedied immediately by a law school that desires compliance with ABA standards. For example, if the ABA determined that a faculty report of noncompliance with Standard 405 (on professional environment) had merit, the ABA would signal that conclusion by asking the law school in question for a response to the report. At that point, any law school administration in its right mind would immediately act to remedy the problem complained about. Why? Because no law school in its right mind wants ABA trouble. So instead of testing the ABA, the law school would remedy the problem and then write the ABA a nice letter saying that everything is fine now.
AMSL is not a law school in its right mind. Indeed, AMSL is entirely dysfunctional. This is proven by the fact that (1) the AMSL administration did not immediately work with the faculty when the ABA asked for a response to the faculty's report of noncompliance on matters pertaining to faculty governance, faculty retention, etc.; (2) the AMSL administration did not immediately work with the faculty when the ABA indicated that it was not satisfied with the response to faculty's report and was sending a factfinder in to conduct an investigation; and (3) the AMSL administration still does not work with the faculty despite a 13(a) request for further information.
Not only has the AMSL administration refused to work with the faculty, it has deliberately sought to inflame the situation by its actions against Safranek, Lyons, and Pucillo. Dean Dobranski might as well have said: "Dear ABA, We have received Professor Butterfoss' report. Now go to hell."
This is why I continue to believe that AMSL is facing a serious sanction, such as probation.
Commenting by HaloScan
