The Ronald Sullivan Debacle

In the little academic world I work within, Ronald Sullivan, Jr. is a big deal. When I started thinking about clemency work-- in 2009-- he was the first person I met with. Sullivan is a Harvard Law Professor who runs a fantastic clinic there; many of the people I have worked with were his students at one time or another.

He and his wife have also served as the Deans of one of Harvard's residential colleges for undergraduates, Winthrop House. It's a job that includes a certain amount of leading, counseling, and inspiring the undergrads, and usually means living in the dorm with them.

Like me, Sullivan sometimes works as a lawyer on behalf of clients embroiled in criminal law (mine are all pro bono; I am not sure if his work is pro bono or paid).  Recently, he took on the representation of Harvey Weinstein, and that is when things got weird, according to the NY Times.

Students protested Sullivan's work with Weinstein, who is accused of a series of sexual assaults. There was a sit-in, and it sounds like the atmosphere was generally tense. Then, last Saturday, Sullivan and his wife were informed that their contracts would not be renewed.

It could be that the termination was based on considerations other than the dispute over Weinstein, but observers seem to think that it was the Weinstein issue that led to the non-renewal. Though, according to the Harvard Crimson, there were allusions to previous management disputes, it certainly seems that the Weinstein representation drove the current turmoil. As it turns out, Sullivan had already withdrawn from the Weinstein team due to scheduling conflicts.

The core problem here is one we often see in political contexts when good defense lawyers run for office and then are castigated for their work: Defense lawyers represent fantastically unpopular people. By definition, their clients are accused of crimes, often terrible ones. That's what defense attorneys do, and it is an essential role within our system of justice. We want someone-- and someone talented-- to be there for the person accused of a theft, of an assault, of selling drugs, or of sexual assault. When I was a prosecutor, I always appreciated a hard-working, smart defense lawyer; their presence meant I had to do my job well. 

To turn a person's representation of an unpopular person accused of a crime into a political issue is wrong, and it may exacerbate a serious existing problem: the difficulty in some places of getting good lawyers to represent those accused of crimes.

Within the context of education, pushing Sullivan out teaches a terrible lesson. The value of defending the unpopular is at the center of our conceptions of justice, and Harvard has affirmed the opposite, as Conor Friedersdorf explained at The Atlantic.

I have no problem with students (or anyone else) protesting Harvey Weinstein. It is senseless, though, to protest the person who might defend Harvey Weinstein in court.