Harvard Law School was abuzz with discussion this past week regarding the handling of 2L orientation. A Dean of Students email from June 2023 described the training as “a new orientation session for returning 2L students designed to help you reconnect with classmates, reflect on what you have learned in your first year and first summer as a law student, and look ahead to your future career.”
Each session, which took place Thursday, September 28, Friday, September 29, and Sunday, October 1, was split into two presentations: “Cultural Competency,” hosted by Professor Russell McClain, and a “Professionalism with Personality Panel” hosted by Leah A. Plunkett, J.D. ‘06, featuring Mark Freeman, J.D. ‘97 (unavailable for Sunday event), Rebecca Rinkevich, and Becca Levine, J.D. ‘08.
Despite months of buildup, students expressed confusion about the purpose of the sessions, as well as annoyance at having to set time aside for an apparently “pointless” training. Confusion soon turned to discomfort, as the Thursday event was disrupted by hateful comments from a particular second-year student.
During the first presentation, McClain asked the audience to provide examples of times where they deployed cultural competency. The aforementioned 2L raised their hand, and when called upon criticized the notion of cultural competency for contradicting “natural law.” The student stated that they believed in “the sanctity of marriage” and that cultural competency was part of a “radical libertarian agenda” meant to repudiate conservative views.
Most students criticized the administration for shying away from a clear stance against homophobia and transphobia, apparently to avoid curtailing speech.
This student has a history of espousing regressive or harmful views publicly. Prior to their time at Harvard Law School, a national publication recorded the student’s predictions of an imminent race war in the United States and their identification as explicitly prejudiced towards LGBTQ+ individuals. During the individual’s time in university, the student government censured them for multiple instances of inappropriate conduct and harassment in their capacity as a member of the student assembly.
McClain soon pulled the conversation away from the student, and tried to proceed with the event, but the diatribe cast a shadow upon the rest of the weekend. On Thursday, a sizable number of disquieted students (by some accounts 40% of attendees) left between the first and second presentation.
On Friday, after stating that he did not speak on behalf of HLS, McClain took responsibility for the debacle and issued an apology for his handling of the conversation before a noticeably smaller audience. In response, an attendee stood up and expressed appreciation for the apology, but added they would “like to hear from the institution, if possible.”
Both the Dean of CEEB, Monica Monroe, and the Dean of Students, Stephen Ball, J.D. ‘10, gave immediate statements in response to the student’s request. Dean Monroe noted that CEEB has taken steps to schedule meetings with the relevant LGBTQ+ and queer organizations on campus, avoiding speaking directly on the substance of the harmful speech. Dean Ball stated that he hoped the students would be able to focus on cultural competency for the remainder of 2L orientation.
Multiple students expressed confusion at the lack of a clear definition for “cultural competency”
The controversy was not mentioned on Sunday, which also suffered from low turnout. McClain gave his best effort to elicit responses from the disengaged crowd; a Friday attendee noted that McClain was “put in an uncomfortable situation” and expressed pity for him. Another Friday attendee noted that, while his performance was imperfect, McClain is “one of the only people in the world qualified to lead these kinds of conversations.”
A number of students, especially those with queer identities, felt that the Law School improperly managed the situation. Multiple students expressed confusion at the lack of a clear definition for “cultural competency,” which they allege left the presentation unfocused. Some also wondered how a student with a long history of recorded prejudice was admitted to HLS. Most students criticized the administration for shying away from a clear stance against homophobia and transphobia, apparently to avoid curtailing speech. One 2L noted that elite universities tend to believe in the “old constitutional notion of free speech no matter the cost” which will “hold on at a law school longer than the students they are teaching will believe them.”
The Professionalism with Personality panel, whose attendance suffered each day due to its position after a break between sessions, left little impression on the students. A Friday attendee noted that an hour-long presentation “on social media and professionalism to a group of people who have spent their whole lives on social media is, with some exceptions, useless.”
The leadership of Lambda (HLS’ general queer student affinity organization) and HLS QTPOC (Queer, Trans, People of Color) met with law school administrators during the past week, and have released a statement on the event listing demands for changes in institutional policy. The hope is that the ordeal will spark a shift away from a “culture of tolerance towards discriminatory harassment.”