Controversy over Carter the story, not the award

In a huge victory for alumni of Yeshiva University's Cardozo law school, the New York Times has now named and shamed Jimmy Carter, making the controversy over Carter, rather than the award, into the main story.

Richard M. Joel, the president of Yeshiva University, issued a statement explaining that the journal is run by students, and that it was they, not the university’s administrators, who chose the recipient of the award. However the event plays out, it casts a light on Cardozo’s unusual position as a secular law school within a religious university — one whose mission is in part to “bring wisdom to life by combining the finest contemporary academic education with the timeless teachings of Torah.”

The law school is closed on Friday evenings and Saturdays, in keeping with the Jewish calendar, and for annual religious holidays throughout the year. It serves only kosher food in its facilities. But it attracts students and faculty from a variety of religions, and its curriculum has no religious or political focus.

In 2010, when Dr. Joel condemned homosexual relationships, Cardozo’s dean, Matthew Diller, made a strong statement in favor of equal rights.

...

“Part of being a law school is being an open and diverse community with a cacophony of ideas which people are free to express,” Dr. Diller said Tuesday. But, he added, “we are part of a Jewish institution and we stand for Jewish values and commitments, and part of that is support for Israel.”

Brian Farkas, the editor in chief of The Cardozo Journal of Conflict Resolution, said that the decision to honor Mr. Carter had been mischaracterized.

He said he had spent the morning engaged in “respectful” discussion with members of the Jewish Law Students Association, and that plans were in the works for a future event that would offer differing perspectives on Mr. Carter’s work.

He added that Mr. Carter, who was not available for comment, had agreed to take questions from students after his address on Wednesday afternoon.

“We never want hurt feelings,” Mr. Farkas said. “I don’t think anyone here knew the extent to which that would result. But that said, it’s going to facilitate a lot of dialogue within the university that wouldn’t otherwise have happened. If one of the top legal conflict resolution programs in the U.S. is not trying to facilitate that dialogue, then we’re wasting our time.”

Among alumni, however, the debate remains somewhat more heated. One graduate announced his intention to try to bar Mr. Carter’s entrance into the school. And the Coalition of Concerned Cardozo Alumni employed another means by which to influence opinion: its Web site calls upon fellow graduates of the school “to condition any continued support of Cardozo, be it financial or otherwise, on the cancellation of this event.”

But Gary Emmanuel, speaking on behalf of the group, said he knew the event would go forward. “They’ve invited a former president of the United States. It would be extremely difficult for them to retract that.” He added, “They’ve created for themselves a real P.R. mess.”

Dr. Diller, the dean, said he sympathized with their outrage. “I think a number of President Carter’s statements and actions about Israel are jarring to the values of the institution,” and to his personal values, he said. But he would not stop the event. “I view this as a test of our institution’s commitment to openness.”

It should be an interesting afternoon....