Writes Elie Mystal in "Protesting an Anti-Trans Trump Judge Isn’t Disrespectful, It’s American/Judge Kyle Duncan lashed out at students who protested his appearance at Stanford Law School, but shouting at political figures is our most protected speech right" (The Nation).
Duncan seems to have come prepared for all of this. He arrived brandishing his cell phone and proceeded to record the protesters.
Well, everyone has a cell phone. Is Mystal saying Duncan walked through the door with his phone aimed at the students' faces or did he merely get out his phone and record defensively?
And, almost as soon as he left the building, Federalist Society sycophants rushed out heavily edited videos of Duncan’s appearance on social media. Then they did their old song and dance about free speech (for conservatives, not the protesters) and civility (toward conservatives, not the marginalized people conservatives hate).
For that, I add the "civility bullshit" tag to this post.
As is usual, they collapsed the difference between the right to appear at Stanford and the right to force Stanford students to sit there like docile automatons while Duncan held forth. Everybody has the right to speak; nobody has the right to be heard over the din of the crowd. But the conservative echosphere pretends not to understand this distinction.
You will have observed that I'm not in the conservative echosphere.
In a more extensive recording of the event—one not edited by friends of the FedSoc—Duncan can be seen being hostile and combative towards the students who stayed to ask him questions. He called some of them “appalling” (later he would call them “dogshit”) and wouldn’t answer many of their questions....
The entire escapade sure seems like a set-up. Duncan went into a hostile environment spoiling for a fight, got one, videotaped it, and then ran to his media spokes-buddies to cast himself as a victim....
I don't know. I think a carefully scripted sequence of events would not have shown the judge exhibiting hostility toward students and calling them "dogshit"! But I do think that after the incident occurred, the "conservative echosphere" hit the ground running, and the other side stood flat-footed. Mystal's essay is the first strong support of the students I've seen, and it only came out today, and the incident took place 6 days ago.
१२४ टिप्पण्या:
"Conservative judges, like Duncan, have chosen to insert their unreconstructed thoughts into our national political debates..." Elie Mystal.
Mystal got into Harvard Law and, let's face it, took the seat of a qualified student simply because of his skin color. He's a liberal idiot.
I haven't read any of Judge Duncan's opinions. I do know, however, he was Order of the Coif at LSU. He successfully practiced law. He's been a federal appellate judge for some time now. His written opinions have to cite applicable law. He's not making stuff up and just spouting his thoughts. Federal judges are most certainly not deserving of being screamed at by "howler monkeys looking for dates."
The law students and writers at the Nation are children.
So the left's endgame has been revealed: everything is political even institutions that are nominally apolitical. This sets the stage for the left to ignore federal court rulings they don't like. After all, the decision they don't like is the product of politics.
This also underscores the long-term danger to society with the blase brushing aside of criticism of the Stanford Law School's Dean Steinbach's actions. All that dean's actions did was to encourage mob thinking rather than reasoned thinking. Law student are there to learn how to argue and reason. They don't need that when they have prospectively decided what subjects, peresons, and arguments will be permitted to be heard.
Litigation exists to avoid mob rule or self-help. If the lawyers themselves view the legal system as nothing but politics people will resort to violence to solve their perceived problems.
This truly is Mao's Cultural Revolution where the students tell the teachers what can be taught.
"Impeach Earl Warren!"
Progressives would have SHIT their pants if RBG was treated this way by Maga protestors.
And yet, there are American citizens rottig away in the DC gulag for trying to do just that. Some protests are more equal than others.
"If they bring a knife to the fight, we bring a gun"
President Barrack Obama
"I want you to argue with them and get in their faces"
President Brack Obama
The cult listened well
Jim Jones anybody? Oh wait.
Ah, nevermind. You wouldnt believe it anyway.
I can not believe that Mystal's essay passes for intelligent analysis or commentary.
I do agree that conservatives hit the ground running because they have seen this script before, whereas the left is used to getting away with this. Law students should know better, though I wonder what percentage of the activist students were really law students (tho being open to the possibility that many were not may be simply wistful thinking on my part.)
When you're on the same side as Elie Mystal...
The Judge planned this as he knew it would be a career building event as he would get instant MAGA name recognition. He succeeded.
It's clear he and his allies hit the ground running trying to weaponize this, which certainly do not support his claim of being some naive innocent here.
Thanks for posting this. I saw it and read it a little while ago and thought I wishAlthouse would blog this. The right has been wanting to fight a culture war, looks like they’re going to get what they want. The left isn’t just going to sit down and shut up.
Ann says civility is bullshit. I guess she’s right. Time to make the enemy live up to its own set of rules. Disney ‘em like your DeSantis.
But I do think that after the incident occurred, the "conservative echosphere" hit the ground running, and the other side stood flat-footed.
We have been watching you fascists run your little struggle sessions for decades.
We didn’t hit the ground running. This has been going on since I was in college 30 years ago.
Gotta admit, I admire your commitment to having people think through this issue. And I agree with the article in the Nation. [We should start a pool: How many people will grouse about the fact that you chose a lefty rag as your source?]
The people who think Marjorie Taylor Greene is groovy think these kids are horrible and that Ms. Steinbach should be fired. At the same time, the folks who are appalled by her behavior think these kids were just exercising their free speech rights. No principle at work, just choosing sides.
Ms. Steinbach came around to affirming the judge's right to speak and gave the protestors the opportunity to leave if they thought they'd be offended. She took, perhaps, a long way around, but she did get that point across.
"they did their old song and dance about free speech (for conservatives, not the protesters) and civility (toward conservatives, not the marginalized people conservatives hate)."
I think Mystal is correct in her assessment, although I'd have dumped the "marginalized people" angle. I don't consider people attending a law school with a 6.3% acceptance rate to be marginalized.
Not sure why you’re obsessed with this story professor (or why you seem so insistent to argue that you’re in the right. You’re not.)
The students and the DEI Dean were intolerant bullies. Fully orchestrated for a viral, bullying, gotcha video. Childish. Petty.
The group that sponsored the event, and those that wanted to hear the speaker speak, were cheated out of that by these cry-bullies.
Don’t go to these events if the speaker triggers you. Go to something else. Have fun at a drag show, or pro abortion rally, or a feminist book reading. I’m certain I would not like those events or the thoughts expressed at them. So I won’t go. But I won’t ruin it for you by going and complaining and preventing you from enjoying it.
Can’t we all just get along? Ugh.
Is Mystal homophobic/transgender? Misogynistic? Misandrist? Pro-Choice? Transhumane?
Women are not men are not women. Many girls and boys pass through puberty, the age of confusion, apparently more of the former with social progress. Johns Hopkins conducted clinical trials and determined that the majority of transgender/neos are not helped through countenancing their cognitive dissonance, and, in fact, therapy normalizes its progress and abortive intent.
We live in a representative republic, sometimes conflated with the democratic/dictatorial duality.
That said, lower the Rainbow banner, sequester the rhetoric, stow your albinophobic pride.
"But the rest of us aren’t allowed to scream and shout and stomp our feet when these unelected, unaccountable rulers poke their heads out long enough to indoctrinate the next generation of fascist sympathizers?"
You were allowed to. In fact, you were encouraged to.
Did you have a point?
According to David Lat, Duncan spoke at Stanford without incident in 2019.
Things have changed.
Inga said “The right has been wanting to fight a culture war…The left isn’t just going to sit down and shut up.”
Good grief, Inga, surely you’re nearly as old as Ann: our ENTIRE lives we’ve watched the Left waging “a culture war”. From the 60’s hippies and anti-war protests, to the Pussy Hats under Trump to the BLM, AntiFa, George Floyd riots…
IT’S ALWAYS THE LEFT!!
If the Right finally, finally, FINALLY fights back, they at least, to honest observers, sure as HELL didn’t start it.
Mystal's essay is the first strong support of the students I've seen, and it only came out today, and the incident occurred 6 days ago.
IOW, after Larry Tribe, Eric Posner, and apparently every other prominent leftist law prof took a hard pass on defending the HLS brat pack, it fell to Elie Mystal to do the dirty work.
It almost seems racist.
"the "conservative echosphere" hit the ground running, and the other side stood flat-footed."
I think what we're seeing is the final touches on a complete parallel media system. It's all probably owned by the same companies or investors at some level, but the conservative media has been built out on the internet to fully rival (at least in miniature) the conventional media. It now has the ability to respond to incidents at least as fast as the opposition.
There was so much market for non-liberal views that it became free money for investors, and free fame/status for people willing to service it. This brought its fair share of grifters, political traitors, side-switching etc. In the process, the "right" has gotten a lot more heterogenous in a lot of ways. Most visibly racially, but also ideologically and religiously.
Elie Mystal: “ Everybody has the right to speak; nobody has the right to be heard over the din of the crowd. But the conservative echosphere pretends not to understand this distinction.”
He, along with Inga and Guitar Joe need to familiarize themselves with Stanford’s code of conduct regarding speech.
I think we need to focus on this line: "Duncan went into a hostile environment spoiling for a fight, got one, videotaped it." I'm not certain cell phones use video tapes anymore.
I was most struck by this:
"Everybody has the right to speak; nobody has the right to be heard over the din of the crowd. "
I wish I could insert an Orwell quote here, and I was afraid to make a Rooftop Korean joke.
-XC
Given the progressive viability of transgender/neo/sim/etc. therapy, separate from the stability of transgender/homosexuals et al, the lack of empathy for victims of transgender conversion therapy, Levine's personal affirmation, through medical, surgical, and psychiatric corruption is second only to the religious zealotry of advocates for the wicked solution. You've come a long way, baby.
"Inga said...
Thanks for posting this. I saw it and read it a little while ago and thought I wishAlthouse would blog this. The right has been wanting to fight a culture war, looks like they’re going to get what they want. The left isn’t just going to sit down and shut up."
Inga, you and your fellow fascist goons started the culture war long ago. You don't need to sit down and shut up, you need to start paying the consequences of your actions.
The right has been wanting to fight a culture war, looks like they’re going to get what they want. The left isn’t just going to sit down and shut up.
I read what Ann wrote- sounds more like the left played in to The Federalist’s trap…
Coming soon! This thrilling trilogy ripped from today's headlines!!!
Struggle Session I: The Inmates In Charge--Marat/Sade at Evergreen State.
Struggle Session II: The Mob, the Dean, and the Judge.
(In Production) Struggle Session III: Palo Alto Delenda Est--Salting the Earth.
The bullshit is getting really, really deep up in here. Can't say that I fully understand why.
guitar joe--Elie Mystal is a boy.
guitar Joe:
Elie is a Black man. At least for now. He's on CNBC from time-to-time.
OK, now do Cruz
https://www.cruz.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/sen-cruz-demands-answers-and-accountability-from-stanford-law-school-calls-for-assistant-deans-dismissal
"Ann says civility is bullshit."
No, I don't!
I like civility a lot. I just think calls for civility are always one sided. People want the other side to stand down and be polite. I make it my business to point that out.
So the left's endgame has been revealed: everything is political even institutions that are nominally apolitical.
There is NO institution left unmolested by the lefties. Science has been corrupted: witness the remarkable willingness to let global warming published papers avoid any real scrutiny of very obvious flaws. Yet they are accepted as if inscribed on the tablet Moses brought down from the mountain. Even musicology and music theory texts are routinely dismissed as exercises in white privilege. We really can't help it that Mozart and Poulenc weren't Nigerians. The AMA and the ABA are now pawns of the most deranged lefties. Universities are giving diplomas to folks who could not otherwise pass 8th grade level tests from the past.
It is the Gramscian march through the institutions.
- Krumhorn
"... Majorie Taylor Greene spending the president’s entire speech braying like a howler monkey looking for a date"
MTG did shout at the POTUS. And she was wrong.
But does the above really represent what occurred at the SOTU? Entire? Howler monkey?
So Biden had to have someone quiet MTG before he could continue?
Did Elie Mystal note MTG's actions were like baseball and apple pie after the SOTU?
So the next SOTU address can be disrupted like the Stanford speech and it would be OK because, "shouting at them is our birthright.... ?
C'mon, man.
Ms. Steinbach came around to affirming the judge's right to speak and gave the protestors the opportunity to leave if they thought they'd be offended. She took, perhaps, a long way around, but she did get that point across.
You (and our hostess) seemed to have overlooked the fact that the "long way around" was a planned attack on the judge in cahoots with the spoiled brats.
- Krumhorn
"I’m old enough to remember the last State of the Union address, and I recall Majorie Taylor Greene spending the president’s entire speech braying like a howler monkey looking for a date."
Slight exaggeration!
Now do Spaz Pelosi paper antics behind Trump.
Probably thought that was cool.
Mystal is correct. I can exercise my right to protest Joe Biden if he is making a speech in my town. I can make signs, get a bullhorn, organize a hundred friends, and we can go yell our heads off. Outside the event. If we go inside and scream at Joe while he’s speaking, or try to push our way in the door, we are very likely to have up close and personal relationships with the Secret Service, US Marshals or local police. Likewise, the kindergarten kids from Stanford can try their brave protest inside the judge’s courtroom, and will get the same result. Mystal’s right to protest is not absolute.
I think what we're seeing is the final touches on a complete parallel media system.
The left had a monopoly on mass communication for decades. It no longer has that advantage because of the internet, thus the regimes' attempt to silence opposing voices through censorship.
Guitar Joe said...
Ms. Steinbach came around to affirming the judge's right to speak and gave the protestors the opportunity to leave if they thought they'd be offended.
Wrong and wrong. She allowed him to speak, and even facilitated his being heard (eventually), but she made clear she was uncertain if the juice was worth the squeeze. In other words, she was unsure if he should be allowed to speak based on the content of previous speeches, rulings, etc.
Dean Steinbach sure "hit the ground running" with her prepared comments.
@Althouse, your appeal to authority was bound to fall flat with the type of conservative that comments on your blog. Doubly or triply so when the authority is Elie Mystal.
There's no reasonable claim of causation between putting the speaker in front of a mike and the behavior of the mob. Thus, no trap is possible.
Mystal's essay is the first strong support of the students I've seen, and it only came out today, and the incident took place 6 days ago.
Probably because there isn't much strong support for the students, and this essay isn't what I would call "strong". Essentially it is saying that if you ever held a political office, then you can get shouted down when giving a speech, even if that speech is academic in nature or the speaker was invited to speak. That's not the behavior my company seeks in the workplace.
"... Majorie Taylor Greene spending the president’s entire speech braying like a howler monkey looking for a date"
Bray? Ass? Donkey? Democrat? You mean "trumpet", right?
Greene was a member of a captive audience, as Duncan was lectured by the DIE (Diversity, Inequity, Exclusion) dean leading a pack of braying Asses.
MTG braying like a howler monkey looking for a date?
Always nice to see the Left reveal how they really feel about outspoken women. I wonder how Elie would react to being called a monkey...
Also, braying? That's what donkeys do, not monkeys. I know they have a lot of the same letters, but monkeys and donkeys don't really sound that much alike.
Mystal is a mendacious idiot.
Let's address the issues raised in Mystal's essay and my blog post. I'm taking out stuff about how Mystal got into law school. Come on.
Look who else bludgeons their opponents as "fascist" --
George W. Bush described his "war on terror" as a crusade against "Islamo-fascism."
And Putin insists that his war of aggression is about the "denazification" of Ukraine.
The WOKE are like Bush and Putin! Evil and disastrously stupid.
As an attorney, I would certainly love to have opposing counsel attack the judge as being a "politician." Keep it up Stanford and Harvard law graduates!
"I recall Majorie Taylor Greene spending the president’s entire speech braying like a howler monkey..."
I didn't watch the speech. Is it true MTG brayed for the entire thing? Beginning to end?
Inga--
Go play with your mediocre racist-oppressor grandsons. They won't have to worry about Stanford of course--they're flyover dummies just like you--and they won't benefit from your coddled Waukesha white privilege either.
If the judge just walked into the town square and started speaking then people around him would have every right to shout him down.
But in this case the judge was an invited speaker. Stanford (or maybe just the law school) has a policy against disrupting speech. All who participated in the disruption should face the consequences, with at least an official reprimand in their file.
They can protest somewhere else. They can silently protest in the hall where the judge is speaking. They can boo specific points, just as people who like what is being said can clap and cheer.
"Everybody has the right to speak; nobody has the right to be heard over the din of the crowd."
This, I think, is the thing she is most wrong about. A listener's right to hear must inherently be a part of any substantive right to free speech. Otherwise, you can't help but narrow the right to something purely formal: sure you can publish your newspaper, and the government can seize (or permit to be seized) all the copies and destroy them.
Keep pushing it, leftists. Keep it up.
But don't blame me when we start showing up with our own goon squads.
Because you were warned.
The notion that people have a free-speech right to shout down speakers at events that others, like the Federalist Society, have organized and paid the expenses for, is ridiculous. That privileges the heckler's rights, but denies the rights of those who wanted to hear what the speaker was going to say. Imagine you went to a lecture at an art institution, and tried to shout down the person presenting a lecture. They'd have security on you in a heartbeat, and show you the door.
For the purposes of that event, the Federalist Soc. owned the room, and was entitled to the protection of Stanford's anti-heckling rule. Not enforcing the rule is a breach of Stanford's obligations to a student organization, as well as being a demonstration of the utter disdain leftists in the University's student body and administrative staff have for anyone else's rights. It's all me, me, me with that lot.
well he is a liberal idiot, not much different than swallwell,
biden is due no respect, everything he touches just withers and dies, aviation rail, the reputation of the military, the police,
"Imagine you went to a lecture at an art institution, and tried to shout down the person presenting a lecture. They'd have security on you in a heartbeat, and show you the door."
Clearly, there are exceptions..
Mystal’s assertion that, at Stanford, everyone has a right to speak, but no one has a right to be heard, is factually wrong.
His defense of the mob is based upon a false premise fatally holing his argument below the waterline.
I keep wondering how many of these crazed and undisciplined yoots will be able to pass the tough California bar exam, or any state bar exam, for that matter.
More likely Newsom will just change the law to have them waived in w/o the exam requirement.
And that, of course, will "cheapen the brand" and create confusion and distrust among the public when it comes time to chose an attorney.
Just think of it, dozens of Lionel Hutts scattered across Cali, working for the state because no firm dare trust their competence. When they realize how they've screwed up their careers, we can expect this:
https://tinyurl.com/2bxn6ysk
Back when I lived with the Yanomami we would eat Howler monkeys. When I moved north and learned that some Mayans considered them gods I stopped eating them. In Panama monkey on a stick was also good but you could never really tell if it was monkey, it was meat on a stick they said was monkey, but it didn't taste like the monkey the Yanomami cooked.
…You’re even soared the 10min lecture from the Google DIE person on what a moron you are and that we have a right to be heard…
Now- what were you saying?
"the "conservative echosphere" hit the ground running, and the other side stood flat-footed."
=======
only the other day we were admiring innovations in high jump and long jump techniques.
looks like we are now witnessing innovation in flat footing? pounce running?
Guitar Joe said...
Ms. Steinbach... gave the protestors the opportunity to leave if they thought they'd be offended.
Sorry, I had intended to address this in my previous comment.
The students already had the opportunity to leave at any point.
Okay, I withdraw my comment regarding how Mystal got into Harvard Law.
But I stand by my comment that Judge Duncan is way smarter than Mystal and that the Judge has the right not to be heckled and shouted down.
Ann Althouse said...
"Ann says civility is bullshit."
No, I don't!
I like civility a lot. I just think calls for civility are always one sided. People want the other side to stand down and be polite. I make it my business to point that out.
=========
Q&A: logic steps to arrive at this wording by Professora? for tagging post
... People [Federalist Society+students in attendance] want the other side [Stanford hecklers?] to stand down and be polite... = civility [bullshit]
... People [Stanford Dean Steinbach] want own side [Stanford hecklers!] to stand down and be polite... = civility [insert ANTONYMS FOR bullshit MOST RELEVANT truth]
"He, along with Inga and Guitar Joe need to familiarize themselves with Stanford’s code of conduct regarding speech."
Here it is:
https://quadblog.stanford.edu/2017/11/07/advancing-free-speech-and-inclusion/
Howler monkeys don't bray. They howl. That's why they're called howler monkeys. It's right in the name.
When Trump was president, people on the left (like Mystal) repeatedly insisted that it was nigh unto treason to suggest that a judge is a political actor.
"If you make me your enemy, I'll be your worst enemy, is the way I go" - Matt Taibi.
So the best the left can come up with to defend the Stanford students is Elie Mystal? LOL
more choices for anti-bullshit
SO the defense of the Stanford students that they were like MGT? That’s a defense? LOL
more choices for bullshit lists 'malarky'
so now Professora and FJB are seared into my hyppocompass
"For the purposes of that event, the Federalist Soc. owned the room, and was entitled to the protection of Stanford's anti-heckling rule. Not enforcing the rule is a breach of Stanford's obligations to a student organization, as well as being a demonstration of the utter disdain leftists in the University's student body and administrative staff have for anyone else's rights."
The progressive left have convinced themselves that anybody who doesn't agree with them is a Nazi, and that where Nazis are concerned, the rules don't apply.
"It's all me, me, me with that lot."
Pretty much.
@narciso wrote “Biden is due no respect.” Whether that’s true or not, the President is due respect, as president, holding the office to which he was elected by the American people. It’s disgraceful that pathetic clowns like Majorie “Space Laser” Greene can’t show respect for the office. Just like a federal judge is owed respect for the office he holds. Although, I note parenthetically , the Stanford case isn’t about civility. It’s about the failure of students to comply with a code of conduct that forbids shouting down invited speakers. They can hold up disrespectful signs in the back of the room if they want—that wouldn’t be civil but it would be consistent with Stanford’s rules and the First Amendment.
People want the other side to stand down and be polite.
No, they want the other side to confess their sins and then shut up, forever.
Lefty Mark and the resident dullard both agree that Elie Mystal is saying things they agree with.
The right has been wanting to fight a culture war, looks like they’re going to get what they want. The left isn’t just going to sit down and shut up.
The left sit down and shut up ? In what century of what universe did the left ever shut up? The "culture war" originated with This guy, who said "Orthodox Marxism had predicted that socialist revolution was inevitable in capitalist societies. By the early 20th century, no such revolution had occurred in the most advanced nations. Rather, capitalism seemed more entrenched than ever. Capitalism, Gramsci suggested, maintained control not just through violence and political and economic coercion, but also through ideology. The bourgeoisie developed a hegemonic culture, which propagated its own values and norms so that they became the "common sense" values of all. People in the working-class (and other classes) identified their own good with the good of the bourgeoisie and helped to maintain the status quo rather than revolting. "
That is where the "culture war" began, with Marxism because they had to change the culture which most people, except lefty Mark and Inga, took as common sense.
Don't comment on my comment moderation. It's off topic.
Kyle duncan is a judge who follows the law i dont know what magic mystal practices but its the remotest thing from the law.
You ask this new crop of apparatchiks they cant define women they dont know articles of the constitution in fact they are contemptuos of it
DBL,
Pelosi's stunt with tearing up the speech was far more disrespectful than anything Green did
I see no reason for Stanford Law students to comport themselves better than Republican members of Congress.
In other words, "They go low. We go lower."
And alinski used agitation or political action for the same purpose.
Culture is downstream from religion (i.e. morality in a universal frame, ethics its relativistic sibling, law their politically consensual cousin). That said, bennies for babies on barbies, a witch in every pot, a warlock at the stake, Sanger at the edges, Gosnell in the clinic, Levine in between. All's fair in lust and abortion.
What we have is a speaker, having free speech, speech being communication to others. We also have a coalition who has a goal of preventing that communication. The speaker can communicate vocally. The coalition can vocalize greater to prevent communication.
So in many cases the coalition raises the decibel level to the point where communication is impossible. Speech is impossible. Thus there is no free speech in the United States. The First Amendment is extinguished.
You guys sound like Admiral Yamamoto blaming his defeat at Midway on Admiral Nimitz for letting the Jap Mega fleet attack the USN seeking to sink the Americans carriers but preparing a sneak attack trap for the Jap carriers that bombed Pearl Harbor six months earlier.
And for the record, Antifa is a private Army paid by Soros with US funds laundered through Ukraine. They are not law students.
They put rbg onna pedestal despite? Her marked disdain for our constitution and they threat clarence thomas as un person because his reference for the document we will skip the fact that they barely blinked against an assasinatiob attempt against at least one justice
Blogger Dave Begley said...
But I stand by my comment that Judge Duncan is way smarter than Mystal and that the Judge has the right not to be heckled and shouted down.
=========
now Blogger Dave Begley is a LAWYER who ?should? know better being trained at than to claim ...the Judge has the right not to be heckled and shouted down...
no wonder legal profession is in such dire straits in USA
- the judge has right => freedom of his own choice of action
- he can have polite expectation (but not a right) not to be heckled etc.
Even for progs, this is bad-faith BS.
"shouting at them is our birthright"
But not to prevent others from speaking and listening, according to school policy.
"The idea that a political speech deserves the quiet deference"
Which no one says.
"I recall Majorie Taylor Greene spending the president’s entire speech"
Hey, I recall Nancy P doing something or other.
"Conservative judges, like Duncan, have chosen to insert their unreconstructed thoughts into our national political debates"
Unlike liberal judges.
"the rest of us aren’t allowed to scream and shout and stomp our feet"
Sure you are, in your own place, not as a mob to intimidate others.
"He arrived brandishing his cell phone and proceeded to record the protesters."
Brandishing! Proceeded!
"Federalist Society sycophants rushed out heavily edited videos"
The dean transcript was soon available, so no editing.
"the right to force Stanford students to sit there like docile automatons"
Huh? No one forced students to do anything. Only progs tried to force anything. As they do. It's intolerable to them that other people should listen to other people they hate.
"The entire escapade sure seems like a set-up."
For which the evidence is . . .
"Everybody has the right to speak; nobody has the right to be heard over the din of the crowd."
This is just a nicer way of saying 'I wholeheartedly endorse the heckler's veto.'** (**Only when he agrees with the hecklers...) I guess Mystal was sick the day they taught ConLaw at law school. The answer, of course, is more speech, such as asking thoughtful questions AFTER the speech is over, or organizing a Federal Judge with an alternative view to give a talk on another night to rebut Judge Duncan's speech. It isn't "free speech" if you are shouted down such that you are prevented from speaking, which clearly was the students' intent. They not only don't want to hear what the judge has to say, they claim the uttering of his views out loud is "violence" and a threat to their safety. In fact, I'd argue the students believe his mere presence on campus is a threat to themselves and an affront to the school. That's how they justify preventing the speech.
"...the difference between the right to appear at Stanford and the right to force Stanford students to sit there like docile automatons..."
Uh, no one was "forced" to do anything. Attendance was 100% voluntary. The disruptive students had to go out of their way - voluntarily - to expose themselves to the Judge's speech. Therefore, they are actually expected to sit there politely, listen to what the speaker has to say, then offer a rebuttal in the form of questions during the Q&A, or in an Op-Ed in the student newspaper, or on social media, or on a podcast if they so choose. There's also the option to, you know, not attend the speech so you aren't 'triggered', have your feelings hurt or whatever. But what Mystal advocates, and what the disruptive students were there to do, is to prevent the guest speaker from even expressing his views in clear violation of Stanford's free speech policy.
Perhaps the Federalist Society should get their Alinsky on and organize a similar protest the next time Mystal or one of his fellow travelers appears at a campus event and shout them down and heckle them incessantly until they require security to leave. I'm willing to wager everything I have that the event would go WAY differently, that the DEI dean would react way differently, that the students, staff and faculty would suddenly discover how precious free speech is to their school values and our democracy, and that the school would suddenly enforce the speech code with harsh penalties. Any takers?
On a positive note, Mystal appears to concede the Judge has a right to appear on campus. Progress. I guess we'll have to work on the right to actually speak...
My primary confusion here, the main thing that makes the steel plate in my head throb, is this: IF conservative judges are really making horrible legal decisions that are harmful to people, wouldn't that be a relatively easy argument to win - with legal reasoning instead of shouting? Law students should be trained to fight with legal reasoning. They didn't do that.
Boo Hoo!
You lefties went way too far, and it...GOT PUBLICIZED! No fair!
Inga thinks this is helpful to the cause of idiot leftism.
It does sorta make Althouse's take seem marginally more sane. But more sane than raving lunacy is a very low bar.
I see Comrade Mystal has reported for gaslighting duty.
Wow, what a shocker, the conservative media using the tactics of palestinian terrorists and democrats with propaganda.
Cry me a river.
“[Judge Kyle] Duncan was treated like a politician, because that’s what he is...and politicians have long understood that, in the United States, shouting at them is our birthright....”
Absolutely. They should go to his courtroom and shout at him while he’s presiding, and stand their ground if he orders them removed. It’s their birthright!
The end state of this is that all conservative judges will show up with an honor guard of 100 armed Oath Keepers. Is that what the fat walrus failed lawyer wants?
Inga said “The right has been wanting to fight a culture war…The left isn’t just going to sit down and shut up.”
The Left is not going to like where this ends.
There was a time when I was at university students left there protest outside. When WFB to the usual monthly flavor of the month Marxist came to speak students were civil and listened. The Q&A was fun and informative, but civil. That was in the first half of the 1970s, nothing important was going on the the country. ;-)
David Lat has released the full audio and it's kind of obvious Judge Duncan got himself a good heckler's vetoing
Obviously Judge Duncan does not have a constitutional right to speak without being heckled. If I invite him into my home to make a presentation for me and my friends, I have a right to dismiss guests who shout him down and prevent me from hearing his presentation. If I rent a space for the presentation, I still have the right to dismiss disruptive audience members.
The students of the Federalist Society don't own the venue for the presentation, but they, and Judge Duncan, have a reasonable expectation that Stanford's policies prohibiting disruption of classes and school functions apply his presentation since the Federalist Society went through school protocols to invite him as a speaker.
Students, faculty and staff who object to his positions and wish to protest should have done so in a way that did not disrupt the presentation. I would expect middle school students, with a bit of adult guidance, to figure out appropriate ways to express themselves, and law school students should be able to meet the challenge with minimal guidance.
When it became clear that protestors were disrupting the presentation, an administrator should have stepped up without being asked, reminded all attendees of policies about disrupting events, and instructed everyone to abide by those policies or leave the event. Asking the speaker, and the students who invited him, if "the juice was worth the squeeze" is just a passive-aggressive form of disruption and was inappropriate per Stanford policies.
The judge was clearly flustered, and I don't know how I would manage a similar situation, but I think I would try to remain more calm and less combative, but that's my personality and I know I am not suited to the combativeness of politics.
Frankly, almost everyone involved has either behaved unprofessionally or made excuses for others behaving unprofessionally. Perhaps they should all be sent to their rooms for time out.
full-audio-confirms-stanford-law-school-students-shouted-down-conservative-judge-in-violation-of-policy
https://legalinsurrection.com/2023/03/full-audio-confirms-stanford-law-school-students-shouted-down-conservative-judge-in-violation-of-policy/
Full Audio Confirms Stanford Law School Students Shouted Down Conservative Judge In Violation Of Policy
Douglas B. Levene said...
@narciso wrote “Biden is due no respect.” Whether that’s true or not, the President is due respect, as president, holding the office to which he was elected by the American people. It’s disgraceful that pathetic clowns like Majorie “Space Laser” Greene can’t show respect for the office. Just like a federal judge is owed respect for the office he holds. Although, I note parenthetically , the Stanford case isn’t about civility. It’s about the failure of students to comply with a code of conduct that forbids shouting down invited speakers. They can hold up disrespectful signs in the back of the room if they want—that wouldn’t be civil but it would be consistent with Stanford’s rules and the First Amendment.
3/15/23, 6:24 PM
More pathetic than MTG is the former speaker of the house grinning like a loon whilst tearing up the State of the Union address in front of the world like the scum she and her party have become. They don't deserve any respect after the last presidency. They can suck eggs. They built this.
"Leftist legal trolls tried to portray the shout-down as contrived by Judge Stuart Kyle Duncan, exaggerated, and the video out of context. The full audio, however, proves it was as bad if not worse than the video showed."
https://legalinsurrection.com/2023/03/full-audio-confirms-stanford-law-school-students-shouted-down-conservative-judge-in-violation-of-policy/
Venturing a speculative guess, Althouse's learned leftism made her sympathetic to the pitch that that DEI dean threw at Judge Kyle Duncan. All these subsequent posts are just rationalizations. The hostess kinda liked that prepared speech the associate dean gave -- and she didn't see it, she was just listening while running, so she missed a few extra clues -- and she decided to buck the more-obvious conclusion that the dean was a destructive loon. I write "learned leftism" because I doubt it was innate. Althouse's leftism was probably formed in that decade she holds in such esteem, the '60s -- a prior huge financial peak when our prosperity convinced so many that the challenges and cruelties of the world could be eliminated by a nice dose of socialism, communism, Haight-Ashbury anarchy, leftist utopia. Whatever particular species of that dream she was seduced by. Only that framework could be so sympathetic to that anti-freedom approach from the DEI angle. But those dreams, we've learned, yield only actual nightmares, of which DEI is just one manifestation.
Lots of attention given this event and exchange that took place.
Very little about the law that Judge got wrong. IF that is what the protestors were protesting
It those protesting wanted to win the day, they should have followed the Judges speech with an answer. Book a different Judge, or Law Proffesor, to dismantle the Judges legal errors in his rulings.
Mystal could have done that. He had six days to write the piece. But the Harvard Law grad never ventured into where the judge got the law wrong. Mystal focused on the team sport, not the intricacies of the law.
This is another data point in the study, proving the left has nothing to rebut Judge Duncan
Fine. Let's stick to the subject of the day. Pretty sad to stoop to The Nation, which supported Stalin's death camps, though.
Interrupting speeches is about abusing power. Of course MTG was wrong, but the Nation's representation of her behavior in that speech is an exaggeration.
In contrast, The Nation fails to acknowledge that Nancy Pelosi, with far more power, disrupted the State of the Nation. Code Pink has disrupted countless public hearings, including national political conventions, all with no consequences. And let's not forget your sainted Jimmah pardoned the FALN terrorists who bombed Congress in 1971, injuring four congressmen, one severely. Or 1983, when females of the Weathermen and others bombed the Senate. All were also eventually pardoned by Clinton or Obama for that and murders they committed, or were never charged. The Nation applauded all those pardons. They are no more reliable a source than The Daily Stormer, except they are powerful in academia and politics.
On to academia. There are no examples of mobs of conservative students and administrators disrupting leftist speakers in academic settings, let alone attacking them physically, but there are hundreds of examples of leftists doing this to conservative speakers -- and if you include people invited then disinvited to speak, that number grows. I know someone cancelled after he was invited and arrived on campus that day to speak -- after traveling to the school.
The judge had spoken before at Stanford with no disruption and was invited back. He probably did learn there would be protests because they were advertised, but none of this was his doing. To claim that he was orchestrating what was done to him is beneath contempt.
The fact that he was disgusted as an orchestrated mob screeched claims that he was racist and trying to harm them, even using explicit sexual slurs, as five colluding administrators sat silently for half an hour makes his verbal response reasonable. He is the victim. Are victims of surprise struggle sessions supposed to silently take the abuse? He agreed to give a speech, not to be the victim of a coordinated struggle session. Even if they invited him to speak about speech and civility, that still wouldn't justify their attack. But that's contract law, right? I hope he takes civil action.
Are you trying to say he "won," because most people denounced the attack, and even liberal commentators (The Nation is literally Stalinist, not liberal) failed to come to the students' and administrators' defense? They didn't come to their defense because the students and administrators were so clearly wrong.
Are you saying that there must be some equity of pundit response? That's incomprehensible, unless you have decided to abandon civility and reason for raw Marxist power games. Even then the math doesn't add up.
You throw out some new excuse every day and misrepresent those who try to take you seriously. Are we supposed to not take you seriously? I say that with all seriousness. Decades ago, serial, orchestrated leftist actions exactly like this one, aimed at me by professional leftist thugs in politics and academia (little difference) because I cordially disagreed on two bills, destroyed my career and shocked the hell out of me so badly I withdrew from society for years -- I was too professionally powerless to mount a response, and colleagues who agreed with me were too frightened for their own careers to defend me, even that far back. It's all about enforcing selective silencing.
This is all a pretty weird hill for a constitutional law professor to choose to die on (common vernacular, no actual threat, ironic that I feel the need to say that here, of all places, but if you defend this with bureaucratic babble, aren't you as bad as they are?).
It's always bureaucratic babble that empowers the silencing. I now wonder what you would have done if you were in that room.
Leftists do not want critical thinking and debate. they want to cancel you.
Like good Nazi Ingas.
Nation(Democratic-Communist)
"But the rest of us aren’t allowed to scream and shout and stomp our feet when these unelected, unaccountable rulers poke their heads out long enough to indoctrinate the next generation of fascist sympathizers?"
The real fascists are the collective left. Look at what Biden is doing to the corporate world - forcing a woke agenda, or else. I guess Mystal skipped class the day they taught the actual definition of fascism.
Ann Althouse said...
"Don't comment on my comment moderation. It's off topic."
But that outfit? Really?
The intolerance of the left and their excuses for it never cease to impress me. Let's review the meaning of ,"guest".
After my chastisement yesterday, I came to a couple of conclusions:
1. I spend too much time here and I have other work to do. Thanks for leading me to that, Ms. Althouse.
2. No one is going to change his or her mind on this issue, despite Ms. Althouse's four passes at trying to get us to think it through. I can't argue that the woke crowd is self righteous and inflexible, but posts here show the exact same tendency on the right.
guitar joe said...
After my chastisement yesterday, I came to a couple of conclusions:
1. I spend too much time here and I have other work to do. Thanks for leading me to that, Ms. Althouse.
2. No one is going to change his or her mind on this issue, despite Ms. Althouse's four passes at trying to get us to think it through. I can't argue that the woke crowd is self righteous and inflexible, but posts here show the exact same tendency on the right.
************
Bullshit. Your idea of flexibility seems to be that we should concede that it's sometimes OK and even necessary to shout down, threaten and even assault people we don't agree with, even at events that are on private property. That's never been the model for "free speech".
As for "no one is going to change his mind", etc.....maybe some of these thuggish legal scholars will change theirs, when they see clerkships and admission to White Shoe law firms denied them.
M W F: We're better than that.
Tu Th Sa: They did it first.
Depriving other people of their free speech rigthts is not "protesting"
It's being a Nazi Brownshirt
Judge Duncan was an invited speaker at a scheduled event. Protests happened outside the event, in a way that did not prevent anyone who wanted to attend from attending
Those were the ONLY "protests" that happened
Everything done by the leftist scumbags inside where Judge Duncan was supposed to be speaking, including every single word that came out of Steinbach's mouth other than "you kids need to shut up and let him speak", was Brownshirt thuggery, not "protest", not "legitimate exercise of freedom of speech"
You talk about "engaging with ideas" Prof. Well, engage with that one.. Because the reality of the situation is that this is the only idea that matters: you cannot legitimately exercise your freedom of speech to prevent the other side from exercising theirs.
And when the other side has scheduled a talk, and people are showing up to hear that talk, you have absolutely no right to stop them, obstruct them.
And that is what this is all about
"Conservative judges, like Duncan, have chosen to insert their unreconstructed thoughts into our national political debates..." Elie Mystal.
Hmm, so imposing Roe on America, a decision completely and utterly lacking the slightest shred of Constitutional validity (we established this when in the argument about Dobbs, no one actually attempted to defend Roe on any grounds other than stare decisis, which can never be grounds for actually justifying the initial decision), was "being a judge"
Freeing America from illegitimate and un-Constitutional left wing decisions is "insert[ing] their unreconstructed thoughts into our national political debates"
I guess I do appreciate it when my enemies rush to make utterly asinine and completely indefensible "arguments". It's nice to know that even the other side understands that their position is complete crap
guitar joe said...
2. No one is going to change his or her mind on this issue, despite Ms. Althouse's four passes at trying to get us to think it through. I can't argue that the woke crowd is self righteous and inflexible, but posts here show the exact same tendency on the right.
Why yes, I think that rape is wrong, not someone "exercising his sexual freedom", and I won't be convinced otherwise. So if you want to call me "self righteous and inflexible", I'll simply laugh in your face
Saying that you have a "free speech" right to deprive others of their ability to speak and listen is like saying you have a "bodily autonomy" or "sexual liberty" right to rape someone whose doesn't want to have sex with you.
Your freedom to swing your fist ends where my nose begins. your freedom to speak ends where my scheduled talk begins.
Until Professor Althouse engages with that, until she stops babbling bullshit about how left wingers "feelings" matter but the rest of ours do not, no, she's not going to get anywhere.
But that's because her position is bullshit, not because we are being "self righteous and inflexible",.
I can't argue that the woke crowd is self righteous and inflexible, but posts here show the exact same tendency on the right.
Well... there's still that "my opponent is stupid" vs. "my opponent is evil" distinction. Many on the right still adhere to the "stupid" interpretation and their comments here show it. Some on the right have concluded that the left actually is evil, and their comments here show that. But even among this latter group, it seems to me that their belief about evil leftists is limited to the powerful and the policy-makers, and they believe that the rank and file are generally still just "stupid" - led by the nose. (Pipe up if I'm wrong about this - I'm starting to join this camp these days myself and that's definitely how I feel.)
But on the left there seems to be a belief that every person who falls on the right side of the spectrum is evil - a racist (that one's evergreen), a something-phobe whose secret wish is that all who are different from them be punished or locked up or eliminated from society, a full-on Nazi.
I may be wrong about this; I admit that I don't venture into the left-leaning swamps much. My husband does, and keeps me posted on the coverage of people on the right vs. left from those perspectives, but my own opinion is formed from what he tells me and what I see among the left-leaning comments here and on a few other blogs and substacks. It certainly seems to me that when our resident left-leaners here use invective against us, not the right writ large but us, it tends to be in "evil" terms rather than "stupid" ones (lots of "fascist" and similar), and the reverse seems to be true of most (but not all) right-leaners here toward the left-leaning commenters (lots of "idiot," "dullard," like that).
All of which is a (purposefully) long-winded way (because I wanted to draw my lines of inference out loud, so to speak) of saying that I think "both sides do it" is not exactly true.
Mystal is a racist. I choose to avoid that sort of person.
All of which is a (purposefully) long-winded way (because I wanted to draw my lines of inference out loud, so to speak) of saying that I think "both sides do it" is not exactly true.
When people try this on me, I ask a question:
Name a single Lefty speaker that was prevented from speaking by a mob of Rightwing protestors in the last twenty years. The only Lefties treated this way were attacked by Leftwingers as not Leftwing enough.
"I think Mystal is correct in her assessment"
There is no need to engage with Guitar Joe.
"Duncan went into a hostile environment spoiling for a fight"
Stanford won't be happy if it's labeled as a "hostile environment" for the not-woke, a place where only wokidoke approved opinions may be voiced. It's supposed to be a university -- there's a hint in that word about why "hostile environment" isn't a good look. But Mystal commits the error of speaking the quiet part out loud, not that it's news to anyone.
"I can't argue that the woke crowd is self righteous and inflexible, but posts here show the exact same tendency on the right."
I meant "isn't self-righteous and inflexible," of course.
"There is no need to engage with Guitar Joe."
I'm no longer surprised at what passes for debate here.
I've watched this thing several times now. I still wish Steinbach had been a bit less DEI in her response, but also still believe she handled things well enough. I also think the responses here only prove my earlier point: You have your positions and you're doubling down.
Also, time to move on...
"Everybody has the right to speak; nobody has the right to be heard over the din of the crowd."
Mystal advances a rationale for the heckler's veto. Oh no, we're not shutting down a speaker, we're not impinging on freedom of speech. You can speak. And we can make so much noise no one can hear you. And that's okay.
I can't think of a limiting principle for that argument. Where would it stop? Right to freely assemble, but no right to be able to hear each other. Right to worship freely, but no right to be heard by those attending. Right to a medical procedure, but no right to enter the facility without... ah, perhaps that's where we can begin to identify a limiting principle?
guitar joe said...
I've watched this thing several times now. I still wish Steinbach had been a bit less DEI in her response, but also still believe she handled things well enough.
Then you are insane.
I also think the responses here only prove my earlier point: You have your positions and you're doubling down.
A thief thinks the whole world is crooked. Guitar Joe thinks the rest of us are all self-righteous and inflexible.
And he doubles down on this position, ignoring and not responding to all arguments to the contrary
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा