Report on investigation into UMD president’s plagiarism must be released

Listen to this article

Darryll Pines is the president of the University of Maryland, College Park. In the fall of 2024, Pines was accused of plagiarizing 1,500 words from a tutorial website for use in a 5,000-word paper that he co-authored. He later reused that text for another publication.

An accusation of academic plagiarism is an accusation of dishonesty; plagiarism also violates the university’s honor code.

The university engaged the Ropes & Gray law firm to conduct an investigation of the charges. Reportedly, Ropes & Gray charged $1,200 per hour and was paid $600,000 for its lengthy efforts, which included a final report containing its conclusions, and one would assume facts that were considered and the bases for the conclusions. Maybe even some law. Yet, one would have to make certain assumptions about the report because the university has refused to release the report.

After a year-long investigation, in mid December 2025, Pines was cleared of these accusations. Yet, an independent committee established by the university did find the presence of “portions of text previously published by another author quoted in the introduction to President Pines’ two articles. We do not know if this was considered by the authors of the law firm’s report.

When the story of his alleged plagiarism was first published in September 2024, Pines wrote to the university’s faculty, “an independent review is in the best interest of the university.” That was a great start on his part, and he said the right thing.

The news that Pines was cleared of these charges by Ropes & Gray was released as a one-page letter in December. The $600,000 report will not be released because the university claims it is a personnel matter. Without a full report in hand, there are no facts or reasons available to support the law firm’s conclusions. The public, the students, and the faculty are merely intended to accept this conclusion and move on.

Without the report to evaluate, there is no transparency in this process. Nobody knows why Pines was cleared of these charges or whether the report contains any caveats. This is not acceptable for the president of a major university who has been accused of plagiarism

Both the university and Pines have an obligation to provide to faculty, students, and Maryland taxpayers the facts that were considered and the reasons Pines was found not to have engaged in academic dishonesty. He is, after all, the head of the university, and he sets the tone for everyone under him. Confidence in a university president is critical. One would think that if the report does represent a complete exoneration, he would hang it on the clothes line for all to read. If it does not, he might fight its release.

We call upon Pines to release this report without delay or instruct the university to release the report. If he fails to do so, he should step aside from his position, because without the ability to analyze the report, its conclusion is unsupported, and this flagship university and its community of faculty and students must have confidence in its leader. Confidence will only exist if the report can be evaluated.

Editorial Advisory Board Members Jeff Sovern did not participate in this opinion.

EDITORIAL ADVISORY BOARD MEMBERS

James B. Astrachan, Chair

James K. Archibald

Gary E. Bair

Arthur F. Fergenson

Nancy Forster

Susan Francis

Julie C. Janofsky

Ericka N. King

George Liebmann

George Nilson

Steven I. Platt

Angela W. Russell

Debra G. Schubert

Jeff Sovern

H. Mark Stichel

The Daily Record Editorial Advisory Board is composed of members of the legal profession who serve voluntarily and are independent of The Daily Record. Through their ongoing exchange of views, members of the board attempt to develop consensus on issues of importance to the bench, bar and public. When their minds meet, unsigned opinions will result. When they differ, or if a conflict exists, majority views and the names of members who do not participate will appear. Members of the community are invited to contribute letters to the editor and/or columns about opinions expressed by the Editorial Advisory Board.