Jeff Sessions

Attorney General Jeff Sessions Rails Against Campus Bias Response Teams

"Donald Trump doesn't believe anyone can tell him how to speak," said Sessions.

|

Sessions
Olivier Douliery/picture alliance / Consolidated/Newscom

In his remarks today at the Turning Point USA High School Leadership Summit in Washington, D.C., Attorney General Jeff Sessions decried the cadre of students, "mostly on the hard left," who seek to silence speakers with whom they disagree.

Sessions reserved particular opprobrium for bias response teams, in existence at hundreds of campuses, which investigate students and staff suspected of committing microaggressions (small offenses or slights).

On this issue, Sessions isn't just talk. The Department of Justice recently joined Speech First, a new free speech advocacy organization, in suing the University of Michigan over its anti-bias policies, which instructed students to consider their own feelings as the best indication of whether they had suffered a microaggression. A day later, Michigan announced it would change the definition in question. (Speech First is still suing over other aspects of the university's speech policy.)

According to Sessions, the threat to free speech on campus is "radical and ahistorical"—and is something that the federal government is taking seriously.

"Donald Trump doesn't believe anyone can tell him how to speak," said Sessions. "Isn't that true?"

NEXT: Andrew Cuomo Wants the State to Save a Failing Newspaper

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Has anyone else noticed that Robby is the most intellectually consistent writer here?

    I humbly await the hate responses

    1. Dammit Just Say’n, I’m too pissed off because Robby doesn’t agree with me on every single issue! That makes him a fake libertarian, and therefore a traitor to the cause!

    2. Robby is one of the best writers on Reason.

      1. Robby Soave appears to be a run-of-the-mill right-winger, roughly as libertarian as the Republican Party platform or the movement conservatism manifesto.

      2. Sullum and Bailey are probably the best writers here.

    3. Robby totally botched this story:

      https://reason.com/blog/2018/03/21/political-
      correctness-strikes-again-high#comment

      Political correctness had nothing to do with why he was fired.

      1. Along with accusing Shapiro of calling for censorship when he did not and smearing Sargon of Akkad, the latter he was forced to correct after credulously accepting the Vox take.

        1. I’m not saying there’s no room for criticizing him. I’m saying that he remains pretty consistent in principle. I also think people don’t appreciate how unpopular his articles must be within the wider world of journalism and opinion writing.

          1. Again, not really. He seems far more concerned about right wing hypocrisy reinforcing its “narrative” of left wing censorship than about the censorship itself.

        2. Along with accusing Shapiro of calling for censorship when he did not and smearing Sargon of Akkad, the latter he was forced to correct after credulously accepting the Vox take.

          Vox lie knowingly for the cause, the greater good, end justify the means etc. In other words just another sordid, sleazy lefty swamp.

          Wasn’t aware of the Shapiro incident. You may not agree with Shapiro but at least he’s pretty intellectually consistent.

          The weird thing about Robby’s story on the fired teacher is that even the mainstream reporting had the facts and he what, couldn’t or wouldn’t, do his research?
          Makes me suspicious.

          1. Amusingly, with all of the hysteria around here from Robby and Joey about Gunn getting fired, and for all of their wailing and gnashing of teeth that someone on the right dared, DARED, to use the left’s tactics against them, Shapiro came out and SUPPORTED Gunn. Was any of that mentioned? Interestingly it was not. So about that HYPOCRISY!!!!!!! thing…

            Oh, and BTW Keith Ellison, deputy DNC chair, sent a note to amazing
            explicitly calling for censorship.
            But that’s different because he’s not in government… oh wait.

            1. all of the hysteria around here from Robby and Joey about Gunn getting fired, and for all of their wailing and gnashing of teeth that someone on the right dared, DARED, to use the left’s tactics against them

              So what you’re saying is you don’t read the articles where they defend the people you like. Or are you saying those don’t count?

              1. No, I’m saying you don’t read the articles where they blatantly misrepresent the facts, but I can see how the two are easily confused for you.

    4. He is also the most ineffectually coiffured writer.

      1. Soaveflake

    5. Cucks of a feather flock together. /just kidding

      1. The funny thing is, a lot commenters think he’s just a lefty prog cuck-fag pretending to be a libertarian for a paycheck, while Arther L Shithead up there thinks he’s “a run-of-the-mill right-winger.” Must be doing something right to piss off both sides.

    6. Not really, no. By consistency I interpret that to mean adherence to principles. So that would be Sullum or Tucille.

      It is interesting that there is zero editorializing here.

      Cue the Reason Defense Brigade.

      1. I forget about Tucille because his articles are either real early in the day and are only up one every other day.

        1. Tucille is probably the most stereotypical libertarian of the writers here.

          I think Christian is quite consistent as well, as all his articles are just pointing out dumb shit governments do.

    7. Well…he’s consistent.

    8. I’m not sure that endless equivocation counts as ‘consistency’.

  2. …instructed students to consider their own feelings as the best indication of whether they had suffered a microaggression.

    I can’t tell you the definition of microaggression, but I know it when I can use it to club you over the head with my victimhood.

  3. According to Sessions, the threat to free speech on campus is “radical and ahistorical”?and is something that the federal government is taking seriously.

    Honestly, I’m not sure how I feel about this.

  4. As always, the most ardent campus censors — those who operate hundreds of fourth-tier, conservative-controlled campuses shackled by speech codes, loyalty oaths, the suppression of science and history to flatter superstition, conduct codes, rejection of academic freedom, viewpoint-based discriminatory in hiring and admissions, and enforcement of silly dogma — receive a free pass from whiny right-wingers who instead nip at the ankles of our nation’s strongest academic institutions.

    Carry on, clingers.

    1. Apparently you don’t understand the difference between private and public institutions with respect to the Constitution.

      1. The good reverend was defending the notion of subsidizing newspapers in a previous article. He’s just a poorly educated clinger

        1. He’s someone who is ashamed of growing up poor so he has become a plutocrat as a gut rejection of his background.

          1. This is probably true. And that mentality is depressingly common among well to do white liberals

        2. I recommended that government exit the business-subsidizing business, you half-educated, bigoted, right-wing, authoritarian rube.

      2. Apparently you don’t understand the difference between private and public institutions with respect to the Constitution.

        Attorney General Sessions did not limit the applicability of his authoritarian, cherry-picked observations to public educational institutions, you bigoted rube. He also chuckled about a crowd of right-wing goobers chanting ‘lock her up,’ and joined the chant, you half-educated goober.

        Is that your Liberty or Ave Maria law degree talking, or are you trying to remember something from an off-brand homeschooling outline?

        Carry on, clinger. So far as your betters permit, that is.

        1. Attorney General Sessions did not limit the applicability of his authoritarian, cherry-picked observations to public educational institutions

          I don’t really give a fuck what Sessions says about non-public institutions. The fact is, the government has no control over the speech patterns of private institutions. I really don’t care if the dear Reverend here sets up a private institution that only teaches Khmer Rouge style communism and demands reverence to Pol Pot.

    2. What kind of whiner does that make you?

  5. There is no such thing as a microaggression.
    Made up word by and for people who cannot articulate their own political positions and refuse to learn.

    Good ol’ Jeffy should just go after the administration for conspiracy to violate constitutional rights. Maybe throw in a few RICO charges for good measure, and get the fair and tolerant Trump to refuse federal funds of an kind to any and all educational institutions who do not allow due process.
    (of course, the end game should be getting the feds out of all education, and abolish the Dept of Education.)

    1. (of course, the end game should be getting the feds out of all education, and abolish the Dept of Education.)

      If there’s an enemy within in the US it’s the Dept. of Education.

  6. Doesn’t anyone within 1000 miles of this article, especially its subjects, have anything better to do with their time (including me)?!?

  7. The dark cloud of intolerance is always descending upon Republicans but it always turns out to be composed of progressives and Democrats.

    Dartmouth Study Finds Democrats Are The Least Tolerant Students On Campus

    Quote:
    In the campus-wide field survey, students of all political stripes were asked how comfortable they would be about living with a roommate who holds opposing political views. Of the 432 students surveyed, only 39 percent of students who identified as Democrats said they would feel comfortable living with a Republican, 16 percent said they felt neutral about the proposed arrangement, while 45 percent, a plurality, said they felt uncomfortable.
    A majority of students who identified as Republicans (69 percent) said they were comfortable living with someone of opposing political views, 19 percent said they felt neutral about it, and only 12 percent said they felt uncomfortable. Among Independent students, 61 percent said they felt comfortable living with someone with opposite views, 22 percent were neutral about it, and 16 percent were uncomfortable.

    1. Wait– Republicans are the MOST tolerant? OMG! Republicans are MORE tolerant than the sainted independents? More tolerant than the SJWs?

      Of course.

  8. This comment by Sessions is proof that even a stopped clock is right twice a day.

  9. Playing to Reason’s snowflakes. The hard right is just as brutish on differing opinions.

    Left – Right = Zero

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.