UC Irvine's chancellor tried to salvage the reputation of his fledgling law school Monday by announcing that he had reinstated Erwin Chemerinsky as its founding dean, but his own troubles persisted as faculty members continued to question why he had sacked the liberal scholar and contemplated taking action against their university's leader.
The agreement with Chemerinsky, made five days after the deanship was rescinded, came after Chancellor Michael V. Drake and his wife flew to Durham, N.C., over the weekend so the two men could speak face to face.
The talks began Sunday morning over pastries at Chemerinsky's home and continued late into the night.
"Many issues were addressed in depth," the two said in a joint statement, "including several areas of miscommunication and misunderstanding. All issues were resolved to our mutual satisfaction."
Drake still faces crucial meetings this week when the UCI Academic Senate holds an emergency meeting to consider his actions and the UC Board of Regents meets in Davis, where some members will probably ask why Chemerinsky had been dropped.
"People at the regents level will be asking what really happened," said Richard Blum, chair of the regents. "At the end of day, the whole thing was a little awkward."
According to Chemerinsky, Drake had said he was pulling back the job offer because of pressure from conservatives over his outspoken liberal politics. The chancellor denied it.
In a conference call with reporters, the chancellor and new dean agreed that Chemerinsky would enjoy absolute academic freedom and would continue to write opinion articles on a wide range of issues, not just legal education as Drake suggested last week.
"Chancellor Drake reaffirmed in the strongest possible way the academic freedom that I would have, as all deans and faculty members do," Chemerinsky said. He later noted that he was aware that his role as dean also would require him to build a broad base of support. Before he was ousted, the dean had sought conservatives for some slots on his board of advisors.
Drake declined to discuss his decision to drop Chemerinsky, and he was vague on the reasons behind his turnaround. "Circumstances change; knowledge comes in," Drake said.
Before the agreement, brokered with the help of a small group of influential Orange County attorneys, both men said their conflict left them feeling bruised. On Monday, however, both professed to have a strong relationship that would not hinder the law school.
Chemerinsky, a professor at Duke University, said he hoped Drake was not so politically damaged that he could not continue as chancellor. "I never would have accepted this position if I didn't think I would have the chance to work with Michael Drake," he said.
Some faculty at UCI were not so supportive.
Business Professor Richard McKenzie did not think the chancellor could keep his job. "I personally do not see how [Drake] can be effective going forward given the opposition across campus to what he did. I've never seen the faculty so unified."
The cabinet of UCI's Academic Senate met in closed session Monday to consider a response to the furor.
The panel has sway over the university's curriculum and has played a critical role at pivotal moments in university controversies. In 1983, UCI was the prime candidate to house Richard Nixon's presidential library, but the sponsoring foundation dropped the university as a prospect after the Academic Senate voted to place restrictions on it.
The panel's current vice chairwoman, Jutta Heckhausen, said: "I think that Chancellor Drake did an excellent job as chancellor for UCI until the Chemerinsky hire. . . . All the more perplexing it is to see him be so secretive and vague about the reasons for rescinding the offer."
She declined to say what proposals were drafted in Monday's closed-door meeting, but an emergency meeting open to all faculty members will be held Thursday to discuss "concerns about academic freedom and the chancellor's leadership on campus," according to Timothy Bradley, a biology professor who is the senate chairman.
Some faculty members said one proposal to be presented would be to investigate whether Drake caved in to pressure from political conservatives when he decided last week to drop Chemerinsky.
Others have pushed for a no-confidence vote.
This week, Drake is expected to be at UC Davis for the meeting of the regents, who must approve Chemerinsky's $350,000 salary. The regents do not have veto power over Chemerinsky's appointment, only his salary. They must approve any salary greater than $205,000.
Some regents are likely to ask Drake informally to explain the controversy.
Blum had been traveling in the Middle East when the crisis over Chemerinsky began. He said he looked into the matter on his return and found no indication that any of the regents were involved in the decisions to fire the law professor or to rehire him.
Blum said he had yet to talk to Drake.
