[81alum]

His letter sounded to me like he was offering to take the whole issue up on appeal before he leaves--and possibly compromise.  I read it as the administration possibly backing away from the precipice.  One way or the other, we will find out if this interpretation is accurate. 

But would he write such a letter if his intention was to take the appeal and then completely affirm the existing ban?  I don't think that would make sense.

It also would allow him to conveniently settle the controversy before his successor comes into office.  I doubt he wants to leave a continuing controversy to dominate the first year of the new Provost's office.

[81alum]

His letter sounded to me like he was offering to take the whole issue up on appeal before he leaves--and possibly compromise.  I read it as the administration possibly backing away from the precipice.  One way or the other, we will find out if this interpretation is accurate. 

But would he write such a letter if his intention was to take the appeal and then completely affirm the existing ban?  I don't think that would make sense.

It also would allow him to conveniently settle the controversy before his successor comes into office.  I doubt he wants to leave a continuing controversy to dominate the first year of the new Provost's office.