The Jurist denounces President Joel’s December statement (see Rachel Kleinman and David Reap, “Joel: Gay Panel ‘Could Send the Wrong Message,’” The Cardozo Jurist, Vol. III, Issue 6, at 1) and asks the Cardozo administration to follow suit. While Yeshiva undergraduates may be expected to adhere to a certain religious code that discriminates based on sexual orientation, the same cannot be said about Yeshiva’s graduate and professional students. It is deeply insulting and emphatically wrong for President Joel to ask Cardozo’s gay and lesbian students to act differently than other students. To do so constitutes discrimination. Asking gay and lesbian students to be “discreet” about their lives is just as objectionable as any other school asking its Jewish students to be “discreet” about theirs.

Cardozo embraces its Jewish heritage by way of Kosher rules and shabbat closings, among other measures intended to show respect for observant Jews in the Cardozo community. These rules honor Cardozo’s Jewish tradition in an inclusive manner. Kosher microwaves enable kosher students to share the cafeteria without imposing a particular set of values upon anyone else. And, until now, Cardozo has managed to celebrate its Jewish heritage without inhibiting student expression or systematically limiting any particular group of students. However, the letter from President Joel strays from that paradigm, actively censoring gay and lesbian students by asking them to remain discreet.

In addition to insulting the Cardozo community, President Joel’s statement sends an unfortunate message to outside observers. In a legal world appropriately concerned with promoting diversity, a reputation of exclusion grossly undermines our school’s efforts at achieving just the opposite. Prospective students may reject Cardozo because they see Yeshiva University as an unwelcoming environment. Prospective employers may not hire students from a law school with a reputation of homophobia. Indeed, employers want to hire people they can imagine functioning in a modern workplace, not limited by myopic biases. Moreover, it is simply embarrassing to be associated with a school that could be seen as socially backwards and bigoted. President Joel may not have had these intentions, but the results are almost inevitable.

We also expect that the American Association of Law Schools (AALS), which requires academic freedom and non-discrimination, will frown upon this situation. While the AALS bylaws allow “preferential admissions and employment practices that directly relate to the school’s religious affiliation or purpose,” they do not tolerate discrimination against students. President Joel’s language seems more akin to unaccredited religious law schools than the respected ranks of AALS members.

Given these consequences, Cardozo must immediately distinguish itself from Yeshiva’s policies. The distinction between Cardozo and YU is unclear. Visit the Cardozo website and, even in a paragraph about “what sets Cardozo apart” from other schools, there is nothing about its Jewish tradition (http://cardozo.yu.edu/info.aspx?cid=286). The popular website top-law-schools.com has a profile of Cardozo that is geared toward prospective students which says that despite its affiliation with YU, Cardozo is secular (http://www.top-law-schools.com/cardozo-yeshiva.html). The Cardozo administration needs to draw a bright line so that everyone knows that Cardozo is an open and secular school. Unfortunately, Dean Diller’s response falls short.

Joel’s statement tells gay and lesbian students and faculty throughout Yeshiva University that they should act in a “discreet” fashion. Dean Diller’s response should have rebuffed or qualified Joel’s statement, either by saying that it was not aimed at Cardozo, or that Cardozo’s diversity goals trump overall. Regrettably, it does neither. Instead, Diller says that YU’s mission is manifested differently in Cardozo than in its undergraduate schools, but he never says how it is different. It also says that Cardozo’s mission is to instill “the highest ethical and moral values,” but there is nothing ethical or moral about subjugating minorities to discriminatory rules. Effectively, Dean Diller’s response says very little, if anything, to combat the discriminatory rhetoric perpetrated by President Joel.

We reiterate the Anti-Defamation League’s position that “all citizens are entitled to the same rights, protections and benefits, regardless of sexual orientation.” We ask the Cardozo administration to endorse that position as well by affirmatively denouncing the hateful words of President Joel. Anything less is a tacit acceptance of discrimination against gays for which we simply will not stand.