Anonymous wrote:I just love the university's statement upon learning they're going to have to pay up:

Oberlin, in a statement, said it would not pursue the matter further and called the decision disappointing.
"This matter has been painful for everyone," the statement said. "We hope that the end of the litigation will begin the healing of our entire community."

Painful?? Yes indeed, it has been excruciating for the Gibson family - something Oberlin has never acknowledging or apologized for. Grotesque behavior.

Anonymous wrote:Oberlin should tell them to pound sand. Judgement or not, right is right.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This decision is a big f#cking deal.

It basically makes colleges responsible for the expressed OPINIONS of its students if such opinions can be viewed as potentially defamatory. And, as Oberlin points out, the only way for a university to avoid a tort is to categorically stop the students from expressing opinions.

Kinda weird that the rightwing so obsessed with “cancel culture” is basically salivating at suing universities for the speech of its students.

Read Oberlin’s appeal, the decision has huge legal ramifications:
https://www2.oberlin.edu/appeal/documents/Memo-in-Support-of-Jurisdiction.pdf

Of course, the next step to this is to sue universities if students accuse someone of being a “rapist” or “sexual harasser.”

Um… you do realize that the MAJOR instigator here was the idiot dean, Meredith Raimondo? She is responsible for whipping up the outrage among the students, and encouraging a woke mob to take down Gibsons over false accusations of “racial profiling.” The college stood by Raimondo, and doubled-down on the absurd accusations. Of course they are responsible for ruining this family. Why are you deliberately ignoring the facts of this case?
DP

Interesting, the university vigorously disagrees with your assessment:
https://www.oberlin.edu/news-and-events/bakery-litigation/10-key-facts

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This judgment against Oberlin has been upheld.
cnn.com/cnn/2022/09/09/us/oberlin-college-bakery-lawsuit-payment-reaj/index.html

Oberlin grad and eegads. I don't really understand how this comes out to a $36 million judgment, though. That seems crazy high based on every recounting I've read of what actually happened.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Oberlin should tell them to pound sand. Judgement[b] or not, right is right.

Ah, the village idiot has shown up.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Reading through this thread shows me.....

1. We have way too many people here (or a few very prolific posters) who either don't read linked articles or don't comprehend what they read.

2. We have way too many people here who have no concept of law and what is legal and what is illegal. To those who opine whether "white" is a protected group.... Good God people.
You are protected from different treatment on the basis of your race, whether you are White, Black, or some other race. You don't have to have gone to law school to know this.

Study, people.

The court case was not about discrimination against the bakery because they are “white.” This is a red herring argument to distract from the issue at hand:
Is a university financial responsible for the speech of its students?

The OH Supreme Court resoundingly decided yes.

That is absolutely not what the case is about. It's about explicit speech and action by the university and their staff under their official capacity, and tortious interference.

Anonymous wrote:Oberlin should tell them to pound sand. Judgement or not, right is right.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Reading through this thread shows me.....

1. We have way too many people here (or a few very prolific posters) who either don't read linked articles or don't comprehend what they read.

2. We have way too many people here who have no concept of law and what is legal and what is illegal. To those who opine whether "white" is a protected group.... Good God people.
You are protected from different treatment on the basis of your race, whether you are White, Black, or some other race. You don't have to have gone to law school to know this.

Study, people.

The court case was not about discrimination against the bakery because they are “white.” This is a red herring argument to distract from the issue at hand:
Is a university financial responsible for the speech of its students?

The OH Supreme Court resoundingly decided yes.

Anonymous wrote:Reading through this thread shows me.....

1. We have way too many people here (or a few very prolific posters) who either don't read linked articles or don't comprehend what they read.

2. We have way too many people here who have no concept of law and what is legal and what is illegal. To those who opine whether "white" is a protected group.... Good God people.
You are protected from different treatment on the basis of your race, whether you are White, Black, or some other race. You don't have to have gone to law school to know this.

Study, people.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Reading through this thread shows me.....

1. We have way too many people here (or a few very prolific posters) who either don't read linked articles or don't comprehend what they read.

2. We have way too many people here who have no concept of law and what is legal and what is illegal. To those who opine whether "white" is a protected group.... Good God people.
You are protected from different treatment on the basis of your race, whether you are White, Black, or some other race. You don't have to have gone to law school to know this.

Study, people.

Well, except under affirmative action where it's okay to discriminate on the basis of race and sex.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This decision is a big f#cking deal.

It basically makes colleges responsible for the expressed OPINIONS of its students if such opinions can be viewed as potentially defamatory. And, as Oberlin points out, the only way for a university to avoid a tort is to categorically stop the students from expressing opinions.

Kinda weird that the rightwing so obsessed with “cancel culture” is basically salivating at suing universities for the speech of its students.

Read Oberlin’s appeal, the decision has huge legal ramifications:
https://www2.oberlin.edu/appeal/documents/Memo-in-Support-of-Jurisdiction.pdf

Of course, the next step to this is to sue universities if students accuse someone of being a “rapist” or “sexual harasser.”

Um… you do realize that the MAJOR instigator here was the idiot dean, Meredith Raimondo? She is responsible for whipping up the outrage among the students, and encouraging a woke mob to take down Gibsons over false accusations of “racial profiling.” The college stood by Raimondo, and doubled-down on the absurd accusations. Of course they are responsible for ruining this family. Why are you deliberately ignoring the facts of this case?
DP

Interesting, the university vigorously disagrees with your assessment:
https://www.oberlin.edu/news-and-events/bakery-litigation/10-key-facts

Vigorously? That's basically a "10 reasons we should have won (but didn't)" tik tok post.

Anonymous wrote:Reading through this thread shows me.....

1. We have way too many people here (or a few very prolific posters) who either don't read linked articles or don't comprehend what they read.

2. We have way too many people here who have no concept of law and what is legal and what is illegal. To those who opine whether "white" is a protected group.... Good God people.
You are protected from different treatment on the basis of your race, whether you are White, Black, or some other race. You don't have to have gone to law school to know this.

Study, people.