Before I say anything else, I want to say that I am sorry to anyone who felt attacked or belittled by this Whip Sheet. This entire thing is awful. I feel terrible about how people are feeling. I look around the community and am upset by the harm done. It
is bad for the Law School community. It’s
bad for dialogue and debate. It is clear this sheet has caused people to feel attacked and belittled, and I am truly sorry. One person told me that some of the arguments made were not merely parody, but mirrored ugly sentiments.
Given people’s immediate and visceral reaction to those sentiments,
I see that using them was a mistake. To provide some context, as most UChicago Law students know, the Edmund Burke Society is a conservative debating society. For twenty-nine years, the Society has hosted debates on a wide range of topics about which conservatives are likely to disagree among themselves. The topic of each debate takes the form of a resolution, which is announced by a Whip Sheet posted at the Law School a week in advance. The purpose of the Whip Sheet is to stimulate interest in the debate topic. In writing the Whip Sheet, the Society often employs hyperbolic language that parodies arguments conservatives or commentators might make
–
conservatives and commentators who can be placed on a wide spectrum from the center to the far right. Oftentimes this language takes the voice of a caricature of conservative
arguments, and some of these arguments can be “out there.”
However, the Whip Sheet does not
announce the views of the Society. Indeed, the Society
has
no view on any topic. The organization adopts a point of view in exactly one way. At the end of each debate after speeches have been made on both sides, those who are present vote either to adopt or to reject the resolution. And then, the arguments advanced in the Whip Sheet have been replaced by those made on the floor. The Whip Sheet is never intended to give offense. And we never want anyone to think that we are attacking them for who they are or what they believe or where they come from. I want to let everyone in here know that, without equivocation, I wish we had not done this. I regret that the language of the Whip Sheet hurt my classmates, and in the future, we promise to be more deliberate about the language that we use. And, in the future, I hope that if anyone has a problem with what is said, they can come to me, we can get a cup of coffee, and we can have a conversation, a dialogue, about where we are both coming from. If people who were hurt by this Whip Sheet had approached me in this way, I would have taken their concerns to heart. If anyone is offended by anything that I do in the Law School going forward, I hope that they can feel comfortable enough to come and talk to me about it.
I’m
grateful to the Law Students Association for the opportunity to speak at this town hall and to
put this week’s Whip Sheet in context. Although this week certainly hasn’t been easy, I’m also
grateful to the many members of this community who have expressed their thoughts to me
—
whether critical or supportive
—
in terms of civility an
d good faith. And I’m
sincerely looking forward to hearing further thoughts from all of you who have turned out for this event. Thank you to Professor Buss for taking your time to moderate this town hall. And thank you to everyone in here for your willingness to speak directly to us about what you think. Thank you, and I look forward to listening and learning during the rest of this event. And I promise each and every one of you that I am going to listen to what you have to say and take your thoughts and feelings to heart.