Apologies require some explanation

We Americans are generally a forgiving lot. If you offer up a sincere enough apology, we’re inclined to accept it. This is especially true in Southern California, where mistakes roll off the Hollywood assembly line with the regularity of sequels.

So it comes as no surprise that UC Irvine Chancellor Michael Drake’s apology to a mutinous faculty apparently turned back a no-confidence vote from the educators after Drake hired, fired and then rehired Erwin Chemerinsky in a matter of weeks to be the founding dean of UCI’s law school. We also appreciate Drake’s mea culpa. Credit is always due when someone’s big enough to cop to a mistake. And usually we ought to move on.

But this is one of those instances in which further discussion is warranted. Sometimes an apology also deserves some sort of explanation why it happened in the first place, if for no other reason than we need to talk about how to make sure it doesn’t happen again.

We’re still waiting for Drake to explain what exactly happened. Last week we called on him to offer more details, and we’re still waiting.

Drake continues to insist he was not pressured by outside forces to change his mind on Chemerinsky’s hiring. Instead, he vaguely says that he was uncertain the esteemed professor could transition into the job. His response to that gut feeling? He ignored it and hired him. Then when that nagging feeling persisted, he changed his mind.

Then the hail storm of criticism rained down on Drake, and he brought Chemerinsky back into the fold.

We expect better leadership and reasoning from an educator of Drake’s stature. And, frankly, we have our doubts. So do many educators as they press on with an investigation into who might have tried to pressure Drake into dumping the liberal professor.

It could very well be that Drake just made an unfortunate error in judgment. That would be the best scenario for everyone involved. But Drake’s vague explanations are feeding speculation that conservatives in the community leaned on him. Hence the indignation from faculty members who rightfully expect that they can speak their minds without fear of recrimination. They’re worried, and they have every right to be. Drake has pledged to ramp up his communication with senior faculty, and we applaud that. Let’s hope it’s enough. The university has suffered enough scorn and ridicule over the past few weeks, and it doesn’t need any more.

Instead, we ought to be looking forward to the school’s opening in 2009 and be proud that a legal scholar who has tasted the rare air of argument-making in the U.S. Supreme Court has decided to call Orange County home.