Feature: The Detroit College of Law at Michigan State University

Under President McPherson's helmsmanship, MSU is fulfilling its longtime dream of a law school and remains eager to face the new challenge. It was the last missing mosaic piece in John Hannah's vision for Michigan State University. Indeed, having a law school at MSU was a dream harbored for a long time by many leaders since. And now, less than two years into his presidency, M. Peter McPherson has pounced on an opportunity to make that dream come true.

If all goes well, the Detroit College of Law will soon be relocated on the banks of the Red Cedar. The historic move would be a unique partnership in American higher education--the only affiliation of a private, independent law school on a public university campus. Moreover, the new school will likely serve the public in a unique way consistent with MSU's land-grant identity.

McPherson spearhead the affiliation with DCL through an intense, inclusive, and thoughtful process. By all measures, the process was a grand success. Helping to facilitate the unprecedented move between the two schools is President Emeritus and MSU economics professor Cecil Mackey--who calls himself a 'transition driver.'

When I first met Cecil Mackey, he was president of Texas Tech University and was in Tuscaloosa, Alabama, being honored as a distinguished graduate and former faculty member of the law school at the University of Alabama. Today, MSU's 16th president is forging the affilitation between MSU and the DCL.

The boards of both institutions already have approved the concept of affiliation. Officials are looking for a building site for the law school.* Law students could be on the campus in less than two years.

To fully understand how all this came about, this must be known: Despite the longtime wish of many that MSU have a law presence (MSU, Penn State, and Purdue are the only Big Ten universities without a law school), McPherson did not seek a law school for the sake of having one. He was not actively shopping for a law school. Indeed, McPherson, himself a lawyer, has repeatedly said that Michigan does not need another law school and that Michigan does not need more lawyers. 'I firmly believe that our society demands MSU students to be better educated about the legal ramifications of the academic areas they are studying,' McPherson says. 'But only after DCL announced its decision to relocate did we fully consider an affiliation. And only after our faculty and students looked deeply into the advantages did we commit ourselves to finalization, leading to my recommendation to our Board.'

The MSU-DCL affiliation will, then, relocate an existing law school to educate approximately the same number of future attorneys. What is new is the approach, a distinctly MSU pioneering approach. 'I do not want a plain vanilla law school,' McPherson says. 'We seek an affiliation that provides a fully integrated law presence that takes advantage of the distinct and even unique strengths of both institutions to serve a fast-changing society. We also must assure that MSU students and faculty can take advantage of having DCL on campus and that their DCL counterparts can be enriched by being on a land-grant, research intensive campus.'

McPherson has talked about a 'distinct law school' that blends legal education with MSU centers of excellence--from environmental studies to criminal justice, from medicine to communications, from agriculture to computer technologies. Early on, McPherson considered the possibility of an affiliation with DCL remaining somewhere in or near the city of Detroit. He soon became convinced that the real strength of an affiliation would come from 'the interaction, the synergy, the sharing that could only occur with an East Lansing presence.'

He has emphasized that the law building should not only be in East Lansing, but be on a part of the campus where day-to-day interaction can occur, 'not off somewhere, isolated from the community.' There's another thing McPherson wants 100-percent assured: that DCL will remain financially viable, not requiring State of Michigan or MSU funds.

When the possibility of an affiliation became known, critics and doubters focused, often very publicly, on an alleged inevitability of co-mingling public and private funds. But both DCL and MSU have made a convincing case before the court of public opinion that demonstrates how and why DCL will remain financially independent.

The story of affiliation between MSU and DCL began when the Detroit-based, 750-student law school concluded last year that it had to leave its current location in order to thrive, probably in order to survive. DCL would not leave the city of Detroit without regret; it's 103-year history and the city's were intertwined. DCL became convinced that for accreditation and other reasons, a move to a major college campus was not only desired, but required. They'd have to move if they were located in Grosse Pointe.

While early media speculation focused on a move to Oakland University, DCL wanted to consider all options. Enter McPherson, who called the MSU community to consider the possibility of affiliation, guided by his firm criteria for financial viability, academic enhancement, and a land-grant, service orientation. A Law School Resource Group, headed by Donald J. Bowersox, John H. McConnell Professor of Business Administration, conducted an in-depth review and presented its pro-affiliation report on January 11, 'Formalizing a Significant Law Presence at Michigan State University: In Assessment and Support of Establishing a Law College Affiliation between the Detroit College of Law and Michigan State University as Part of a Comprehensive Law Alliance.' 'This group of faculty and staff worked long hours to produce an outstanding report,' McPherson notes.

The academic governance system followed with its review and advice on the issues. And then there was a much publicized briefing before a joint gathering of the House Higher Education Committee and Appropriations Subcommittee on Higher Education. At that briefing McPherson and George Bashara, president of the DCL Board of Trustees, convincingly repeated the assertion that taxpayer money would not be involved in any affiliation. Subsequently, the governing boards of DCL and MSU approved the merger. Each voted unanimously. 'This is a dream come true,' said MSU Trustee Bob Weiss. 'We were already an excellent university. Now we will be an extraordinary university.'

In an opinion piece in the Lansing State Journal preceding the vote, yet another MSU president, Gordon Guyer, our 18th president, wrote that the law affiliation would serve Michigan in the same way our service- oriented medical colleges have addressed the needs of the state. 'Years from now,' Guyer noted, 'we will cite this partnership not merely as helpful but as historic.'

What's next? Mackey will be working with both institutions to reach formal conclusions. There will be a search for a dean of the law college--the Detroit College of Law at Michigan State University--and a campus location for a $25 million law building will be determined. It is hoped that up to $5 million can be raised from private donors. Separately, perhaps the naming of the new building will follow a major contribution. Too, formal bylaws and other matters related to integrating the affiliation into the campus community will be developed. Transition for DCL students could begin as early as 1996; students enrolled prior to relocation would complete their studies in Detroit. And so, after a long wait, a missing flavor will be added to the MSU experience. Rest assured it won't be plain vanilla.