ew things are more painful than having a beloved student fall from grace owing to utterly despicable behavior on the student’s part.  Surely, this is the case with Alan Dershowitz and his former student Eliot Spitzer.  Dershowitz describes Spitzer as a brilliant student; and I have no doubt that this was the case.  Everything that we have seen about Spitzer suggests that he is a man of quite considerable intellectual ability. Just so, Derhowitz’s defense of Spitzer is most disconcerting. 

The claim is that he called MSNBC to offer some comments about Spitzer.  It would have been far more prudent morally if Dershowitz had remained silent.  Now, Dershowtiz’s major claim is that the United States is simply out of step with the times, because prostitution is common place throughout the world. 

Well, let us suppose for the moment that Dershowitz is right.  It then follows that Spitzer’s very own behavior as attorney general was woefully inappropriate and out of step with the moral reality of things.  As we all know, it is not just Spitzer prosecuted prostitution rings, he did so with a zest and vigor that had no equal among attorney generals.  Not only that, Spitzer did so with an extraordinary sense of righteousness and moral piety. 

What is more, Spitzer was roundly admired by all for doing what he did.  No one even came close to suggesting that he should have been less zealous in prosecuting corruption.  No one—not even Alan Dershowitz—suggested that.  Dershowitz never came close to suggesting that Spitzer’s zeal in these matters represented a misguided view of morality. 

So, in defending Spitzer of the allegations being made against him, the man Dershowitz revealed himself to be a morally disingenuous person.  And Dershowitz’s eagerness to go on television in order to defend Spitzer reveals a moral vapidness on Dershowtiz’s part that I would not have thought possible and which is woefully unbefitting him. 

And if that were not enough, the simple fact is that, for political reasons, Dershowitz has chosen to ignore the bigger picture—a picture that has two parts.  One is that Spitzer was unfaithful to his wife.  And we are not talking about a one-time fling, but a calculated pattern of unfaithful behavior involving quite complicated on-going transactions.  Calculated unfaithful behavior is not sanctified in Europe.  No one seems to think “That is what we do”.  That sort of behavior is deemed morally indecent even in that much more sophisticated country, to hear Dershowitz tell it, known as Europe. 

The other consideration roundly ignored by Dershowitz is that Spitzer brazenly betrayed the public trust.  It was none other than Spitzer himself who cultivated an image of himself as an upright person in the matter of steadfastly opposing corruption.  It was on the basis of that trust, cultivated while he was New York’s attorney general, that Spitzer was elected by a landslide to be Governor of New York.  He was voted into office because he presented himself as the kind of person that New Yorkers wanted to run their state. 

Accordingly, Spitzer both egregiously deceived people and betrayed their trust.  Again, I am not aware of Europeans thinking that deception and betrayals of this magnitude are but petty forms of inappropriate behavior.  And I do not think for a moment that Dershowitz is aware of such a mindset among Europeans, either. 

Even if engaging in prostitution is itself nothing more than a petty infelicity—on the order of saying “ain’t” when one should say “is not”—there is nothing at all petty about misleading people to think that in regards to the matter of marital fidelity one is not open to criticism in any way whatsoever.  And this point holds regardless of what we think about prostitution, as the following example shows.

Suppose that Opidopo is known by everyone to be one who imbibes very little alcohol.  One drink is about all anyone has ever seen him take; and often enough he does not finish that.  This behavior is part of the public image that Opidopo has cultivated.  As it happens, however, he consumes quite a bit of alcohol on a daily basis when home alone.  This by itself is not morally wrong at all.  Yet, most of us would not like to think that he barely touches alcohol when in fact he is a heavy drinker.  For this bears upon all sorts of things that one might ask of him.  There are lots of tasks that one unhesitatingly ask Opidopo to do, given that one has every reason, thanks to how he has presented himself, to view him as a non-drinker.  Of course, if he is a heavy drinker there is nothing wrong with that in principle.  Yet, it would be woefully inappropriate of him to mislead his friends.

Now, betraying people’s trust is not a legal wrong as such.  However, it does constitute an enormous defect in moral character.  And people can have very good reasons to be morally outraged over just that.  It is utterly inconceivable to me that a man of Mr. Alan Dershowitz’s intellectual wherewithal does not grasp this point.  This means, then, that Dershowitz has revealed his own moral character to be just a little sullied. 

Finally, I understand that there times when it is possible to put a positive spin on things.  And I am willing to allow that this is what good friends do for one another or what a professor might do for someone who was a beloved student and is now a major player on the political scene.  Alas, the very problem with the Spitzer fiasco is that it does not in any way shape or form lend itself to any measure of positive spinning.  And for Mr. Dershowitz to suggest otherwise is none other than sheer arrogance on his part.  But, alas, the fact that he volunteered for the part suggests that he is not only arrogant, but that he is lacking in a substantial measure of moral integrity. 

Speaking personally as a professor: I grasp what it is like to have beloved students—students who have enriched my life beyond measure by their intellectual challenges.  But if I should brazenly falter and betray the trust of others, it is my hope that none of them will come to my defense.  And I say that because I do not think for a moment than any of them would expect me to come to their defense were they to falter brazenly and betray the trust others.  And if anyone them does, then I have not, as a professor, exhibited the kind of moral excellence in teaching and instruction that I should have exhibited. 

In my world, Mr. Alan Dershowitz: Beloved teachers and students do not give one another a free moral pass.  This is how I know that your defense of Eliot Spitzer stems from none other than ignoble motives.