Can $300,000 in additional scholarship money to prop up U of I's US News law school ranking be defended on moral grounds?

Following up -- hopefully for the last time -- on LLB's earlier coverage of the University of Illinois College of Law admissions scandal published here and here, the Chicago Tribune is reporting that during a hearing before the Mikva Commission last week, former U of I Law Dean Heidi Hurd testified that Chancellor Richard Herman “would reach into his discretionary funds" to provide additional scholarship money. Why? To help offset any US News law school ranking hit the College of Law might otherwise take for being forced to admit students of politically connected families who had subpar credentials. See the Tribune story, Documents: Law school billed U. of I. for $300K in 'scholarship support.' See also the Tribune's U. of Ill. dean traded admissions for scholarships.

How Much Scholarship Money? According to the first cited Tribune report, the College of Law received approximately $304,000 in additional scholarship funds for admitting 24 "special admits" between 2004 and 2007. If my math is correct, that's an average of $12,666.67 per clouted under-qualified admitted student. The story observes that "the dollar amount increased dramatically from the practice's inception, starting with $25,815 for three students in 2004 and jumping to more than $100,000 in scholarships for seven students in 2007."

Clearly under Hurd's watch as dean from 2002 through 2007, the College of Law got better at grabbing cash from the Chancellor's funds and improving its admissions under US News' all-powerful ranking metrics. From her web profile: "Under her Deanship, the College of Law significantly increased incoming student credentials to place them among the nation's Top 15 based on LSAT scores and median GPA." By the morally bankrupt standards of Chicago-style politics, Hurd proved her street credentials.

Just Following Orders. According to the National Law Journal's coverage of Hurd's testimony, Hurd said she fought the pressure to admit clouted students "at every turn," was "incensed" by them, but felt she had no choice but to follow the orders of her university superiors. "I certainly did not take myself to have the authority to say 'no,'" said Hurd. This from a law prof whose most widely acclaimed work, Moral Combat (Cambridge UP, 1999), puts forth the the argument that the law cannot require us to do what morality forbids. If Hurd felt so strongly why didn't she put her deanship on the line? She could have become a whistle-blower like Glen Weissenberger did at DePaul Law. Few No one in the media would have questioned the veracity of Hurd's claims during the Boss Blagojevich era of Illinois politics. Instead, expediency trumped just saying "no" to corruption.

Here's a situation where interested parties who have lifetime job security did nothing publicly when going public was the only option left to treat all law school applicants equally. Defenses of the U of I College of Law in the wake of these revelations can be found in the law prof blogosphere. They all boil down to this -- admitting politically connected students to public law schools is a widely if reluctantly accepted practice because university administrators and law profs are powerless to do anything about it. Indeed, it is so widely accepted that in an open letter to the Chicago Tribune a group of U of I law profs had no second thoughts about characterizing political selections in law school admission as a "non-story story" and trading favors, in this case, additional funding, for admission to law school as "morally untroubling."  How can $300,000 in additional scholarship money to prop up a law school's US News ranking be defended on moral grounds? 

All Applicants Treated Equally. If ever there was an opportunity to end the corrupting influence of politics in public law school admissions, it presented itself at U of I when Blagojevich was governor. Instead, people just looked away when the devil put his hands on their shoulders. Thanks to the power of subpoenas and Chicago Tribune investigative reporting, the University of Illinois College of Law will now treat all applicants equally. In a letter to staff, faculty, students and alumni quoted by the National Law Journal, U of I Law Dean Bruce Smith writes "under my deanship, the college will give no 'special' consideration, treatment, or procedure to any application." See Illinois Law Dean Announces New Admission Policy in Wake of Scandal.

Perhaps the policy will be adopted at other public law schools... [JH]