Editorial: Moores should take criticism as he gives it

The University of California Board of Regents was right to
distance itself from its chairman, who has berated university
admissions using only slim evidence of any real problems.

Board Chairman John Moores began his charge by indicating that a
study he conducted ““ which showed some students were being
admitted to UC Berkeley with low SAT I scores ““ was
evidence that the UC was practicing affirmative action.

Moores’ very public campaign insulted both students and
Berkeley’s chancellor. But for eight regents who voted to
censure him, Moores crossed the line when he wrote an editorial in
Forbes Magazine, pre-empting a report by a special university
committee that was created to address possible admissions problems.
(When released, the report assuaged many people who had initially
shared Moores’ concerns.)

Moores said the censure was an assault on his free speech. And
certainly Moores has the right to say whatever he wants.

But if other regents found their chairman’s shallow
criticism to be irresponsible and potentially undermining, they
also had a right to express their concerns. And good for them for
doing so.