So I'm reading Coach's Mistake Becomes a Teaching Moment (you can tell someone is taking it real easy if they have time to read the NYT's sports section). It's an unhappy story about Hofstra's new basketball coach, just signed for a $3 million five-year contract, wrecking his coaching career by driving while seriously drunk. The coach immediately resigned, and the Times's estimable George Vecsey thinks this was right and proper and indeed necessary.
And I'm wondering: what if this happened to a law professor? Would that be grounds for firing or resignation-in-advance-of-firing?
On the one hand, it would seem odd to have a lower standard for a law professor — whose business after all is teaching people about the law, and producing future officers of the court — than for a coach.
On the other hand, the law prof deals with older students, is likely to be much less of a dominant role model, and has tenure (at a far, far lower salary) rather than a contract.
My first instinct was no; my later rational thought was well, maybe yes. In this context, it may be relevant that the thrust of the Times column was that drunk driving today — at least, seriously drunk driving — is now seen as a much more serious offense than it was a couple of decades ago. Indeed, one might almost say that drunk driving today (or at least drunk driving where one is seriously over the limit) is now seen as a crime involving moral turpitude.
I'd be most interested in hearing other views. Let me emphasize that the question is purely hypothetical (and in my case, given the very tight alcohol limits imposed by my cardiologist, very likely to stay hypothetical!).