Not just the protestors, but all students who attend Stanford. They are cancelling the whole school because a small group of students tried to cancel a federal judge who was speaking at a Federalist Society event. They are already boycotting Yale.
Hey, more opportunities for the UM law students!
"We will not hire any student who chooses to attend Stanford Law School in the future," Ho, who sits on the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, said Saturday evening in a speech to the Texas Review of Law and Politics, a transcript of which was reviewed by the Washington Free Beacon. The clerkship moratorium, like the one on Yale, will exempt current law students.
Ho's announcement is the latest and most dramatic effort to hold Stanford accountable for its treatment of Fifth Circuit appellate judge Kyle Duncan, who was shouted down by hundreds of students—and berated by Stanford diversity dean Tirien Steinbach—when he spoke at the law school last month. The students called Duncan "scum," asked why he couldn't "find the clit," and screamed, "We hope your daughters get raped."
Though Steinbach is on leave, Stanford has ruled out disciplining the hecklers, who by Stanford's own admission violated the school's free speech policy.
"Rules aren't rules without consequences," Ho said. "And students who practice intolerance don't belong in the legal profession."
9 comments:
Look at us! We want to be Supreme Court nominees, so we need to be mean and become culture warriors. Good luck writing good opinions with the Ave Maria clerks. And, good job demeaning the position you hold by waging war on law students. Nice.
Law students that don’t know how to consider both sides and craft a logical argument?? Yeah right. These students should have chosen a different profession and you know it.
I can appreciate that rules aren't rules without consequence, but part of that is also that the party enforcing the consequences is the proper party, i.e., has authority to do so. A board enforces its bylaws, a teacher enforces classroom rules, and a state prosecutor enforces criminal laws. I don't see the connection between an out-of-circuit federal judge and whatever rule the students are alleged to have violated. Moreover, regardless of whether or not issues with due process and overbroad punishment have merit, the appearance of a judge bypassing those entirely seems to weigh poorly on the profession.
Coming soon in the retaliation game will be judges that leans left announcing a moratorium on hiring clerks who got their undergraduate degree from a Florida State school (or maybe even their high school diploma) because as per policy they were not allowed to be educated about topics of inclusion, diversity, historical prejudice, etc..
People, these judge are talking about not hiring ANY law student from Stanford not just the students who engaged in the protest. This is a grandstanding flex that's all.
St. Thomas law school can fill the void caused by the Stanford and Yale boycotts.
I am fine with not hiring those law students. But publicly nixing entire schools to make a point? No different than Kim K. showing ass to get a few mentions and likes.
More likely blackballing any nominees who ever belonged to the federalist society.
I don't think the paper saved from the lack of applications from liberal students at Stanford to the Fifth Circuit is going to cure deforestation.
Post a Comment