Editorial : Law school wastes resources, time on harassment case

Members of the College of Law look forward to the end of a 100-day investigation of a law student for allegedly creating the satirical blog SUCOLitis. Faculty prosecutors claimed the blog constituted harassment, and the case will be settled later this week.

The law school has drawn this case out far too long. The school wasted resources and time, and it compromised its reputation before ultimately deciding the controversial case would be settled quietly within the school.

Too many facts remain unclear. The law school charged one student when the website claimed to be authored by a group. And none of Syracuse University’s definitions of harassment directly encompass the nature of this case.

From the beginning, the law school has blown the offensiveness of the blog and the ensuing investigation out of proportion. Hiring a federal judge to settle a case at an institution that teaches law constitutes an incredible waste of resources. The school should have kept the case completely internal and resolved it months ago.

The blog’s possible effects on the reputation of the school and its students pale in comparison to the bad press the school has created for itself in this case. For a law school with already low national rankings, this case may be retroactive in recruiting talented students.

The settlement should not have included shutting down the website, which disappeared over the weekend. Protecting students’ reputations may be particularly important at a law school. But taking legal action to ban students’ speech sets a frightening legal precedent, causes self-censorship and limits free expression throughout campus.