Home  >  Texas  >  Longhorns: Senator used clout in UT law school admissions

Longhorns: Senator used clout in UT law school admissions

By   /   November 13, 2013  /   News  /   No Comments

Part 7 of 72 in the series Trouble in Texas
State Sen. Judith Zaffirini lobbied Chancellor Francisco Cigarroa to let a favored candidate into law school.

State Sen. Judith Zaffirini lobbied Chancellor Francisco Cigarroa to let a favored candidate into law school.

By Jon Cassidy | Watchdog.org

AUSTIN — On Dec. 3, 2010, state Sen. Judith Zaffirini tried to use her clout with University of Texas System Chancellor Francisco Cigarroa, writing a letter on behalf of an applicant to the University of Texas School of Law.

On Dec. 14, Cigarroa wrote back, assuring Zaffirini, “I will convey your strong recommendation to President Bill Powers” and “I can assure you that he will receive careful consideration.”

Regent Wallace Hall is facing impeachment for mentioning the existence of two letters like this one. At Hall’s show trial Tuesday before a select committee, his persecutors made it clear their strategy is to accuse him of a crime for sharing this information.

Yet, curiously, the letters themselves were hardly mentioned Tuesday. This is why.

The proper channel for recommendations is the Law School Admissions Council. Letters sent outside that channel are clearly meant to gain the applicant admission through influence rather than merit.

It isn’t hard to understand why Cigarroa didn’t correct or scold Zaffirini — university officials invest a lot in trying to keep Zaffirini and a handful of other lawmakers happy.

There are the flattering notes. “Somehow, a football game is dull without your presence in our suite so I get a little jealous when you are in WP’s suite,” Cigarroa emailed Zaffirini last year. WP refers to UT President William Powers.

Then there’s the money. The five luxury box tickets to all Longhorns home games, which the university system has provided since at least 2010 to Zaffirini, her husband, her son and two of their friends, are worth about $30,000 a year.

Then there are the admissions favors, and the question of how effective and commonplace are letters sent outside of the Admissions Council.

Watchdog.org obtained the letter above with the applicant’s name redacted through a public records request. The redaction suggests the applicant was admitted, as unsuccessful applicants are not protected by the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act.

FERPA is a federal student privacy law that restricts the sharing of “education records” that are “directly related” to a student. Depending on who’s doing the interpreting, that can cover almost everything at a university, or nothing but grades and test scores.

As Barbara Holthaus, the University of Texas Systems’ privacy law expert, said Tuesday, “It’s very gray. FERPA is not a black-and-white law.”

Hall’s persecutors are trying to establish that he shared “FERPA-protected information,” not with the public, but with his defense attorneys, and in doing so, broke a state law prohibiting the disclosure of confidential information.

“FERPA-protected information” is a usefully vague term for Hall’s accusers, as it doesn’t refer to anything specific and verifiable. It’s an abstraction that exists only in the minds of education bureaucrats, each of whom sees something different when he squints at it.

But here’s what Hall’s accusers mean by the term: letters — letters from lawmakers exercising their clout with the highest officials in the UT system, going outside the admissions process to get their kids and their cronies’ kids into school, particularly law school.

Hall found at least two examples of lawmakers pulling strings to get students admitted to law school. He’s facing impeachment for making this fact public, even though his public statements contain less information than the public can obtain through a simple records request.

Hall still hasn’t named names and his accusers are laboring mightily to make sure he doesn’t.

State Rep. Ferdinand “Trey” Fischer, a member of the committee, asked committee counsel to see about getting the Travis County District Attorney’s notorious Public Integrity Unit to bring charges.  But the law Fischer cites restricts operators on legislative committees from leaking confidential information, and has nothing to do with officials at universities or anywhere else in state government.

That’s no matter. Fischer’s deception has already served its purpose, getting headlines about Hall and law-breaking in most of the state’s major newspapers.

Hall’s attorney Allan Van Fleet rejects the assertion the emails between lawmakers and Powers are protected by FERPA, and it’s an easy case to make, as courts often reject the argument a record is secret merely because a student is mentioned.

In 2007, a Florida court ruled that “(d)ocuments maintained by an educational institution like FSU do not qualify as ‘education records’ merely because they mention, identify, or refer to a student.”

In 2009, a California court rejected as “fanciful” the idea “that all emails that identify” a student should get the same protections as “a student’s folder in a permanent file.”

The influence peddling e-mails in Hall’s case, however, aren’t part of a student file. Had they been proper recommendations sent to proper Admissions Council channel, Hall wouldn’t have seen them.

One of the emails show that “a senator sought special consideration for an applicant who had been rejected, but was strongly supported by another senator,” Van Fleet told the committee. “In the communication, the senator seeking special treatment reminded the UT Austin official of recent legislative action taken to benefit the university. Upon information and belief, the rejected applicant was subsequently admitted to UT Austin.”

FERPA didn’t apply at the time Hall obtained that letter because “the student discussed was not admitted at the time,” Francie Frederick, general counsel to the UT System Board of Regents, testified Tuesday.

The applicant has since become a student, and is now entitled to FERPA protection going forward, which suggests the special consideration sought by the senator was successful.

One of the accusations against Hall is that his large records requests have been too much of a burden for the university.

It turns out that Zaffirini, one of Hall’s accusers, is far from shy about imposing work on the public records staff at the university system.

On March 26, Zaffirini filed a massive request for “any and all data that relate in any way to the following categories,” naming Powers, Hall and some two dozen people, dating back two years. The system had to contract an outside company to fulfill the request.

She wrote Cigarroa to complain it was taking staff too long to fulfill her requests.

“Frankly, I don’t understand such delays and what always seems to be an over-abundance of concern about what might be confidential – when, of course, usually it is not,” she wrote.

Contact Jon Cassidy at [email protected] or @jpcassidy000.

Part of 72 in the series Trouble in Texas
  1. Texas’ Rep. Pitts announces retirement after improper influence story
  2. University of Texas regents show support for Wallace Hall
  3. Case against UT regent Wallace Hall is a sham — here’s proof
  4. Texas senator got $477k for supposed ‘cameo’ appearance in Wallace Hall lawsuit
  5. Lawmaker admits pulling strings on UT admissions
  6. Trustee accused of crime for rejecting dodgy accounting
  7. Longhorns: Senator used clout in UT law school admissions
  8. Children of Texas lawmakers get into UT School of Law, but struggle to pass bar exam
  9. Chancellor is probing favoritism in UT admissions
  10. UT report: Charge against Hall is legally ‘absurd’
  11. Attorney in UT case hides six-figure charges despite terms of contract
  12. University of Texas clout scandal grows as new e-mails surface
  13. Four more get into UT Law despite low LSATs
  14. Reports on UT favoritism, impeachment expected soon
  15. Attorney: Secret tape covered up by lawmakers proves regent’s innocence
  16. Dozens of UT Law’s least qualified students are connected politically
  17. University of Texas uncovers admissions corruption, halts investigation
  18. UT admissions: Straus, Branch, Pitts pulled strings
  19. Who got the 128? UT Law admits students with bad LSAT scores
  20. Patrick’s win may doom Hall impeachment effort
  21. Chancellor promises complete investigation of UT admissions
  22. Board to decide UT president’s fate Thursday
  23. Texas politicians smarten up, ditch UT pres this time around
  24. Tribune story may have doomed UT’s Powers
  25. Academics condone the privilege they denounce
  26. Three essential stories on the UT admissions scandal
  27. Texas AG Greg Abbott embraces Roe v. Wade
  28. Roe v. Wade is AG’s new pretext for blocking Texas law school investigation
  29. Two UT regents pressed for records destruction
  30. New crime invented for Hall: assisted guesswork
  31. Texas lawmaker failed to disclose his own clout letter in UT flap
  32. Texas legislator Fischer insists on role in UT investigation
  33. Hutchison pulled strings for friends’ kids and grandkids at UT
  34. Ex-UT Law dean’s credit card bill: $400k in four years
  35. Abbott’s UT picks are pro-affirmative action
  36. Report: University of Texas showed favoritism to thousands
  37. Kroll ignored hundreds of weak UT applications
  38. Billionaire defends UT admissions privileges for ‘leaders’
  39. Weak admissions to University of Texas Law increased after Sager’s ouster
  40. Kroll report takes dig at Watchdog.org
  41. Hicks won’t stop UT’s backdoor admits
  42. Texas governor’s wife was on UT nominee’s payroll
  43. Bill to limit UT oversight clears committee
  44. UT regent blasts speaker for ‘abuse of office’
  45. Texas politician rebuts himself with apparently plagiarized letter
  46. Pay-to-play scandal involves UT dean, Texas Exes
  47. Supreme Court asked to look at UT’s backdoor admissions program
  48. Lawmakers want UT applications shielded from scrutiny
  49. McRaven makes UT scandal his own
  50. An open letter to Attorney General Ken Paxton on the UT cover-up
  51. Chancellor Bill McRaven’s UT cover-up has no defenders
  52. UT’s back door still open, but can’t stay secret, AG rules
  53. Whitewash: Kroll left dozens of bad LSATs out of UT report
  54. McRaven’s defense to Hall lawsuit refuted by own words
  55. Ready for the end of affirmative action?
  56. UT admissions scandal is 10 times bigger than official report
  57. McRaven trolls Dallas Morning News
  58. Powers to get top salary at UT Law
  59. UT sues to block Watchdog access to admissions investigation
  60. UT approves ‘Spinal Tap’ policy for backdoor admissions
  61. Admissions survey: No, UT, everybody doesn’t do it
  62. UT admissions scandal prompts new investigation
  63. Ticket scandal a black mark for UT, DA
  64. Showdown over UT cover-up nears end
  65. McRaven’s rationale for UT cover-up denounced by regents, AG
  66. High court to decide if University of Texas can deep-six investigation
  67. High court hears arguments on whether UT can bury investigation
  68. Testimony by UT contradicts story fed high court
  69. These ‘horns ain’t loyal, McRaven finds
  70. UT’s Hall challenges Abbott over board picks
  71. Texas Supreme Court nullifies rule of law; impunity to reign
  72. The battle for the Kroll records goes on

Sign-up for our Trouble in Texas email list to receive the latest news and in-depth coverage.

Click here to get this great content in print


Jon Cassidy was a former Houston-based reporter for Watchdog.org.