Reply to Stanford dean of DEI attacks invited speaker, Judge Kyle Duncan

Forum Index » Political Discussion

Reply to "Stanford dean of DEI attacks invited speaker, Judge Kyle Duncan"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]I am against clerkship boycotts.  But to be honest, clerks from top 25 schools are pretty much fungible.[/quote]

I think it is very much warranted in this case.

"Rules aren't rules without consequences," Ho said. "And students who practice intolerance don't belong in the legal profession."
Calling the disruption an act of "intellectual terrorism," Ho argued that Duncan's treatment reflects "rampant" viewpoint discrimination at elite law schools, some of which do not employ a single center-right professor.
It is no coincidence, Ho said, that the worst free speech incidents have occurred at the law schools with the least intellectual diversity. Though Ho did not say what it would take for him to lift the boycott, he implied that a more politically diverse faculty—and a less ideologically uniform administration—would go a long way.[/quote]

How is what Ho is doing different from cancel culture?[/quote]

What is it the left always likes to say?  “Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.”[/quote]

Interesting. This question has only been met with whattaboutism. I guess you all are fine letting "the left" write the rules of engagement.

Cheers, carry on.[/quote]

That's not true.  Posters pointed out that no law student is guaranteed a clerkship and those positions are for students who demonstrate the demeanor to be a strong lawyer - which these students do not.  
It is not cancel culture at all.  Bad behavior has consequences.  [/quote]

But he's refusing to hire from entire schools, not just the "bad behavior" students. You're right, this is beyond cancel culture, this is cancel culture with a mix of guilt by association and guilty until proven innocent.

Not only that, but he is trying to make a point about viewpoint diversity on law school faculty but also excepting current students from his hiring ban (aka don't worry current fed soc students, you're protected, but in the future conservative students should not go to YLS or SLS if you wanna get a clerkship).

What a holy cocktail! Well done, Judge Ho.[/quote]

DP.  I’m copying this again since you’re conveniently ignoring it.  Ho specifically states that the disruptive students should be identified so law firms can avoid hiring THEM.  And he’s absolutely correct.  No doubt if these law students were conservatives behaving like this, you’d be calling for their heads.  They get exactly what they deserve, which is to be blacklisted from reputable law firms.

“[b]Second, at a minimum, law schools should identify disruptive students, so that future employers will know who they’re hiring. [/b]

Schools issue grades and graduation honors to help employers separate wheat from chaff. Likewise, schools should inform employers if they’re at risk of injecting potentially disruptive forces into their organizations.

Without that information, employers won’t know if the person they’re hiring is in one category or another. Now, some employers may be okay with that. But others may not be. No one is required to hire students who aren’t taught to live under the rule of law."[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics