I don't see the need to have any further discussions with Drake. He had his chance and blew it yesterday. I believe Drake must resign, must resign immediately, and AGS should call for his resignation for the following reasons:

1. Drake bowed to outside pressure and fired the future dean based on his political views. This has been well documented.

"Although Drake has denied that he took action under pressure from conservatives, Loftus said Thursday that the chancellor told the committee during an emergency meeting Wednesday night that he was forced to make the decision by outside forces whom he did not name. A second member of the committee confirmed Loftus' account to The Times but asked to remain anonymous." (oc register)

2. Drake lied about the reasons.

"I made a management decision - not an ideological, political or
personal one - to rescind Professor Chemerinsky's offer. The decision
was mine and mine alone. It was not based on donor pressure or
political pressure; it was based on a culmination of discussions -
over a period of time - that convinced me we could not effectively
partner to build a world-class law school at UC Irvine. That is my
overarching priority." (Drake's email yesterday)

Drake is an embarassement for this University and every graduate student and faculty member working here.

Although I don't disagree with the author of this post, whoever he or she may be, the fact is, if we ask for Drake's resignation, we are guaranteeing ourselves a lousy year in terms of cooperation from the administration. We have spent the last couple of years rebuilding the administration's willingness to listen to us, and frankly, we need that.

That said, I think we should allow other bodies -- UCSA, UCOP, and the Academic Senate (both the UCI division and the state) -- to call for Drake's resignation. Is it cowardly? Yes, I guess it is in one light, but it is also prudent.

Drake put out a response in the form of a letter to the editors of the LA Times. In that letter, he states clearly that his decision is based on what he feels is best for the University and not politics. If we take him at his word, he did not trust or believe the major groups advising him to hire Chemerinsky. He did not trust the search committee members, who were among the best people affiliated with UCI. He also did not trust the Executive Vice Chancellor, who he had previously called one of the best in the country. If he is going to make such a large decision, going against the best advice that the best people in our community can offer, he does not deserve to be a part of the community.

It seems the big problem Drake has with Chemerinsky is that he was publishing too many Op-Ed pieces. One of my thesis committee members is well known for his political involvement, writing and Op-Ed work. Is he going to be fired by Drake? I was well known on campus for my (rather libertarian) political views, am I going to be expelled? Chemerinsky says it best: "My concern is that the message from this episode, especially for my more junior colleagues who may aspire to be deans someday or, for that matter, judges, is that if you speak out -- liberal or conservative -- you may lose your chance at a position that you really want."

Basically, regardless of why Drake has done this, he has destroyed any trust the faculty may have had in him. He has also destroyed any belief I have had that he will effectively lead UCI. After starting off so well two years ago, I don't think Drake belongs here after all. On our own, AGS cannot do anything to Drake, and it would be foolish to try. If the faculty want our support in taking Drake to task over this, we should be ready to support them.

Brett Goldsmith