College PC

A Harvard Law Professor Is Representing Harvey Weinstein. Students Say This Makes Them Unsafe, Demand His Resignation.

Ronald Sullivan's choice of clients is "not only upsetting, but deeply trauma-inducing," according to activist students.

|

HW
CARLO ALLEGRI/REUTERS/Newscom

Ronald S. Sullivan Jr. is a law professor at Harvard University and faculty dean of Winthrop House, one of the college's 12 residential houses. He was the first black man to serve in such a position, and also directs Harvard's Criminal Justice Institute and Trial Advocacy Workshop. In 2008, he advised the campaign of then-Sen. Barack Obama on criminal justice issues. He represented Michael Brown's family in their suit against the city of Ferguson, Missouri, and his work has led to the release of over 6,000 wrongfully incarcerated people.

You might expect Sullivan to be in good standing with the progressive activist community at Harvard. You would be wrong.

Earlier this month, more than 50 students attended a protest demanding that Sullivan resign his position as dean over alleged #MeToo failings. The Association of Black Harvard Women also wants him gone. "What has been made especially clear is that you have failed us," they wrote in a letter. "You have failed the Black women in this community, not only as one of the few Black Faculty Deans on campus but also as a community leader—someone who we respected and looked to for guidance."

Notably, Sullivan himself has not been accused of sexual misconduct or any #MeToo-related wrongdoing. But he has agreed to represent disgraced movie executive Harvey Weinstein, who was accused of sexual harassment and assault by multiple women—and that in and of itself is apparently an unforgivable offense, in the eyes of victims' rights advocates.

Harvard's administration is taking students' concerns seriously, and has agreed to conduct a review of Sullivan.

"In this situation, we would like to have a more complete understanding of the current environment at Winthrop House," wrote Dean of the College Rakesh Khurana in an email, according to The Harvard Crimson.

One of The Crimson's own staff members*, Danukshi Mudannayake, is spearheading the effort to remove Sullivan. She started a change.org petition that claims his representation of Weinstein as "not only upsetting, but deeply trauma-inducing." According to Mudannayake, Sullivan has made clear that he does not "value the safety of students he lives with in Winthrop House."

These concerns are, to put it mildly, absurd. Weinstein is not his first loathsome client; Sullivan also represented former NFL player Aaron Hernandez, who was convicted of murder. Every person accused of a crime deserves competent legal representation—even Weinstein and Hernandez. It's abundantly clear that Sullivan takes the principled liberal view that due process matters, and that the accused deserve fairness in the criminal justice system. His entire career is built on these ideas. Agreeing to represent an accused sexual abuser is not an endorsement of sexual abuse.

It's extremely disappointing to see the administration humor the students' misguided notion that Sullivan's choice of clients somehow makes Winthrop an unsafe place, but Khurana's statements have given some credence to this view.

"I take seriously the concerns that have been raised from members of the College community regarding the impact of Professor Sullivan's choice to serve as counsel for Harvey Weinstein on the House community that he is responsible for leading as a faculty dean," wrote Khurana. "I have also met with Professor Sullivan to discuss his responsibilities to the House and have communicated that the College believes that more work must be done to uphold our commitment to the well-being of our students."

The Foundation for Individual Rights in Education's Samantha Harris lamented that "the Harvard administration is taking these demands—which boil down to calls to penalize and marginalize a criminal defense attorney for defending criminals—seriously."

This episode is yet more evidence that modern progressive activism is regrettably at odds with previously cherished progressive values. For many on the left, free speech and due process are not principles to defend, but obstacles to overcome.

*Update: I initially described Mudannayake as an editor, which is how The Harvard Crimson refers to her. However, it seems the paper uses the term "editor" for most entry-level staff members, even if they are not managers. The actual editors enjoy fancier titles.

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.

165 responses to “A Harvard Law Professor Is Representing Harvey Weinstein. Students Say This Makes Them Unsafe, Demand His Resignation.

  1. Harvard’s administration is taking students’ concerns seriously

    Which is why this horseshit keeps going on. Tell the brats to shut up and get back to studying.

    1. And give them back their tuition and expel them. I doubt Harvard would have any problem finding a replacement.

      1. This! So Much this. If you are a Harvard Law Student, and you can’t wrap your head around why even the worst of us has a right to competent counsel, and how denying anyone such undermines out entire legal system and social fabric by destroying one of its core principles, then frankly Law is not the profession for you. Not in this country anyways.

        1. I don’t think any of the protesters are law students. Winthrop House, which seems to be at the root of the protests, is an undergraduate residence. Sullivan is a law professor who happens to also be an adviser at Winthrop House.

          1. I’m sure Winthrop house could use a few “learn to code” posters.

            1. Ya got that right.

            2. Start working at home with Google! It’s by-far the best job I’ve had. Last Wednesday I got a brand new BMW since getting a check for $6474 this – 4 weeks past. I began this 8-months ago and immediately was bringing home at least $77 per hour. I work through this link, go to tech tab for work detail.
              >>>>>>>>>> http://xurl.es/jobsnet

          2. Start working at home with Google! It’s by-far the best job I’ve had. Last Wednesday I got a brand new BMW since getting a check for $6474 this – 4 weeks past. I began this 8-months ago and immediately was bringing home at least $77 per hour. I work through this link, go to tech tab for work detail.
            >>>>>>>>>> http://www.payshd.com

          3. I hope none of them are law students but, knowing what I know of the lot, I suspect more than just a few are.

      2. Put them to death.

      3. Google is now paying $17000 to $22000 per month for working online from home. I have joined this job 2 months ago and i have earned $20544 in my first month from this job. I can say my life is changed-completely for the better! Check it out whaat i do…..

        click here ======?? http://www.payshd.com

    2. Those “brats” are legacies. The real victims today are rich kids. Never forget that.

      1. Those “brats” are legacies.

        Some of them likely are, but the odds are far higher in The Current Year that they’re affirmative action admissions.

        1. I think it’s still like 40% of undergrads who don’t get any financial aid, for an $80,000 per year education. There are plenty of legacies around.

    3. In case you’re not depressed enough, just realize that a few of those brats will become federal judges. And it’s possible these a future Supreme Court Justice or two in the mix.

      1. This is what happens when you don’t allow a little bullying on the playground. Or playgrounds.

        1. What a stupid comment. These complaining students are the bullies. Maybe you are suggesting they should have been assaulted by other students when they were younger, which is an even dumber suggestion.

      2. I was thinking that if the poor little snowflakes in *law school* can’t handle something third hand a professor is doing – representing a probable lost cause who at least deserves a competent attorney – we are in deep trouble when the future lawyers and elected officials come across real conflict. (And real opponents who don’t care what their professors did just as long as they are good teachers.) Fortunately, for me, I am to old to see the coming catastrophe. I do pity the younger generations, and those yet to come, for what they will have imposed on them by this mess.

    4. Nah, fuck that. Expel the little shits so that the kids who want to study don’t have to put up with their noise.

      -jcr

      1. Their parents have clearly not beaten them enough.

    5. Those “brats” and their parents give money to Harvard and pay salaries. Yes they are insane, spoiled chidren, but their money spends the same as from anyone else.

  2. Harvard’s administration is taking students’ concerns seriously, and has agreed to conduct a review of Sullivan.

    To the extent that any of these students are Harvard Law students, the concern would be retardation and Sullivan’s failure to explain what exactly a law school even is.

    1. Yeah… I’ve got to think that participating in this protest should be grounds for immediate dismissal of any law student.

      But let’s not kid ourselves; education is clearly secondary to indoctrination. At a certain point, you’re just voting to have your rights taken away.

      1. Is dismissal for protest not the same as protest of defending unsavory clients? Pat them on the head and say suck it, we we’re doing moot Court and you’re all defending Harvey.

        1. “dismissal” might not be the right word. I think they should be flunked out for an obvious failure to understand the subject matter that they are studying.

          I like your solution, but you’d probably end up losing your job after you were reported for making them feel unsafe by being insensitive to their experience.

    2. Mister Hart, here is a dime. Take it, call your mother, and tell her there is serious doubt about you ever becoming a lawyer.

      1. Great post…

    3. Yeah, there is something wrong if a law student thinks that icky people shouldn’t get legal representation.

      If they don’t get why free speech is important, I suppose it’s not a big surprise that they don’t think due process is important either.

      1. This is Harvard Law, where women students complained about how having to discuss rape in Criminal Law class traumatized them.

        1. Repeal 19…

        2. When I took the Professional Responsibility Exam, I had two Harvard Law students behind me discussing a course they took called “Law and Existentialism.” I could not roll my eyes hard enough.

  3. Haha. These kids don’t believe in the fundamental notion that every defendant has a Constitutional right to an effective assistance of counsel?

    It might this professor’s fault for not actually teaching young people. Young people’s utter stupidity just happens to be backfiring on Lefties this time.

    1. It’s certainly not the only constitutional right today’s collegians believe subordinate to their feels – first and second A clearly take a backseat.

    2. It’s certainly not the only constitutional right today’s collegians believe subordinate to their feels – first and second A clearly take a backseat.

  4. I’m scared too, you guys.

  5. He was the first black man to serve in such a position, and also directs Harvard’s Criminal Justice Institute and Trial Advocacy Workshop. In 2008, he advised the campaign of then-Sen. Barack Obama on criminal justice issues. He represented Michael Brown’s family in their suit against the city of Ferguson, Missouri, and his work has led to the release of over 6,000 wrongfully incarcerated people.

    I’m not surprised a Brit is attempting to use their power to pacify a dark-skinned, indigenous foreigner.

    1. We’re still overcoming the effects of their long colonozation of the Americas.

    2. For being a Brit, she picked up on the American system pretty damn quick – clever girl!

  6. Every person accused of a crime deserves competent legal representation?even Weinstein and Hernandez.

    Unless Sullivan is the assigned public defender for the case, I’m not sure how this is relevant. He’s not taking the job out of some duty or obligation, he’s taking it for the money.

    1. That matters?

      #BlackMoneyMatters

      1. Sure. Being entitled to a lawyer doesn’t mean that any given lawyer is obligated to defend you, it means that the state is obligated to find some lawyer to defend you if you are unable to find one yourself.

        Seeing as he was able to find one himself, it just isn’t relevant.

        1. It is absolutely relevant. Despite personal feelings, these lawyers need to understand the law, and that sometimes it’s gonna make you feel icky. It’s a great teaching moment, especially in terms of “not feeling safe”.

    2. “He’s not taking the job out of some duty or obligation”

      I’m willing to say you can’t know this.

      1. “Know”? Sure.

        Reasonably suspect? Sure.

    3. Exactly. When the ACLU defended the Klan, smart people thought “Ermagawd, the ACLU wants to lynch black people!”. You’re super smart and stuff

      1. First-up, y’all like the ACLU again? When did that happen?

        Second-up, the ACLU bent over backwards explaining their decision and the Constitutional issues at play. Not terribly comparable.

        Third-up, yes, lots of folks judged them for that. Just like libertarians have routinely been judging them for siding with gay activists over the last decade. Judging folks for the company they voluntarily keep isn’t new, even when it comes to lawyers.

        1. Yes. Your position is retarded. Agreed

        2. Libertarian criticism of the ACLU has everything to do with them not defending civil liberties anymore. Unless you think forcing religious hospitals to perform abortions and trying to bankrupt bakeries has anything to do with “civil liberties”. In which case, you’re not smart.

    4. Of course Sullivan is getting paid. Why should he not? He’s a highly skilled attorney. Trust me, that does not come cheap. And yes, Weinstein could get a PD, but don’t kid yourself that a PD could muster the defense that this case requires. So Weinstein is willing to spend his money on an exceptional attorney; that does not mean that the exceptional attorney will take the case. I’m sure Sullivan considered the potential impact on his situation at Harvard and decided that the principle of defending even the most unpopular defendant takes precedence over comfort and convenience. He deserves credit and support, not vilification.

    5. [blockquote] He’s not taking the job out of some duty or obligation, he’s taking it for the money. [/blockquote]

      Your argument proves too much. No private lawyer is obligated to take his case. And public defenders and similar court-appointed counsel (who will not be available in this case) are still responsible for knowingly placing themselves at risk of representing naughty people. Thus, everyone who could represent Weinstein is a sinner to the Harvard Left.

  7. “cherished progressive values”…

    Robbies making shit up again

  8. I can’t wait for the “words are violence” argument to reach the tipping point and devolve into actual violence with mass civil unrest and widely accepted “if disagreeing with you is violent, I may as well defend myself with actual violence” justifications.

    1. Give it time; ;likely tipping points:

      “Notorious” RBG dies, and is replaced with Amy Coney Barrett [or similar]

      Trump is re-elected in 2020 [I believe that is more likely every day when I see and hear what the Democrat front runners are spouting]

      Feel free to add; it is going to happen.

      1. I have a pet theory that the Dem leadership has realized how little chance any of their “mainstream” (Hillary, Biden) candidates have against Trump as long all those shouting socialists remember how Hillary kicked Bernie to the sidelines. They’re letting the kids scream and rant and get it out of their system, so the “adults” can sort out the real race in time for 2024.

        1. Nice theory; but it presumes the kids will, um, roll over by 2024.

      2. “Trump is re-elected in 2020 [I believe that is more likely every day when I see and hear what the Democrat front runners are spouting]”

        What the whole Democratic party is spouting.

        During the 2016 campaign, Trump came off as an uniformed asshole. But the Democrats today aren’t just uninformed, they’re misinformed. What they ‘know’ to be true is absolute nonsense. And Trump may be an asshole, but he’s never threatened to use nuclear weapons against Americans.

        1. The Dems are coming off as unhinged, say anything socialists..

        2. Shows how bad the media is about lying.

          Trump ghas been correct over and over and over again.

        3. It hurts me, but I have to agree.
          And this kind of story just further shows how crazy people are getting.

    2. We already have the Proud Boys.

  9. So Harvard be racist?

    1. What, according to these morons, isn’t [racist] any more?

        1. Been there, have you? What was your orgasmic ratio, by the way?

        2. Which makes it all the more unusual that she turned you down flat.

          Hell she’d fuck Tony.

          1. I’ll never forget the words, “I ain’t gots time for you white boys. Move along nah.”

            It broke my heart.

            1. Yeah. She didn’t care.

              She cruel.

            2. Good to see you have joined the ranks of the race-realists!

      1. Accept in this instance we know Harvard is actually racist.

        #AskAnAsianAmerican

  10. We need to shutdown the entire Ivy League until we can figure out what’s going on there. Harvard’s not sending us their best

      1. The border wall should be put around MA rather than Mexico

    1. That’s because they’re working so hard to keep out the Asian kids.

      -jcr

  11. So now we can add the right of the accused to legal representation as one of the civil rights progressives want thrown out.

    1. It depends on the crime, perpetrator and victim. No due process for sex-related crimes and non-crimes, especially when the victim is not “cis-“, straight, and male. However for other crimes, at least when the perpetrator checks off intersectionalist checkboxes and the victim doesn’t, due process out the wazoo.

      1. Well our collective lived experience now resides at the intersection of Fucked & Beyond Help.

  12. The rote repetition of the words “unsafe” and “traumatizing” makes these complaints sound more like magic incantations than reasoning coming from the country’s top young legal minds.

    1. Magical incantations go with magical thinking…

    2. This is a great comment, mickey.

      Very, very insightful.

    3. Yeah, but I still needed “problematic” and “erasure” in Vacuous Left Language Bingo.

  13. If you go to college to be “safe” you’re doing it wrong.

  14. I’m having some sort of glitch with Reason website with sections of articles missing. I can’t find the part where Robbie explains conservatives are just as bad.

    Does anyone know how to fix this?

    1. Having the same glitch here. Or maybe Robbie is finally realizing that strained virtue signaling weakens his actual point.

    2. The parts where someone always has to make this comment is working fine, though.

  15. What’s the problem?

    Do these activist law students feel entitled to demand that Weinstein has a lesser defence?

    Maybe they should be flunked.

    1. Flunking does not happen at Harvard Law.

      A few drop out.

      1. Many years ago, I was dating a girl who was ostensibly a math major at harvard. I know she pretty much blew off all her work for the last half of her senior year, but apparently they don’t want to admit it when they fuck up, and they let her graduate.

        -jcr

        1. They let her graduate.

          It is far past late September. At least you remember her.

          As I get older days long past become more clear than recent ones.

        2. If the administration is that corrupt, they are terrified of being blackmailed by activist students.

        3. “…she pretty much blew off all her work for the last half of her senior year, but apparently they don’t want to admit it when they fuck up, and they let her graduate.”

          They didn’t “let” her do anything. They made a conscious decision to override the course of academic affairs, and to graduate her. She’s merely the beneficiary of their academic largess, and as such, is not really the principal subject of this tale.

  16. Harvard’s administration is taking students’ concerns seriously, and has agreed to conduct a review of Sullivan.

    Let the lawsuits begin. Lawsuits by *Sullivan*, that is.

  17. One of The Crimson’s own editors, Danukshi Mudannayake, is spearheading the effort to remove Sullivan. She started a change.org petition that claims his representation of Weinstein as “not only upsetting, but deeply trauma-inducing.”

    “Indeed, almost as trauma-inducing as when people fuck up the pronunciation of my name!”

    1. How the hell is it “trauma inducing”? It causes trauma to know that a professor is representing someone you don’t like in court? If that’s trauma for you, you need some serious psychiatric assistance.

      1. “No need since I’ve been bringing my support hedgehog, Gertie, *everywhere*.”

      2. Yeah, nothing induces trauma like hearing that a trial attorney is doing his job. I think what they are most afraid of is that Sullivan may establish that a lot of the charges are dust in the wind.

  18. This episode is yet more evidence that modern progressive activism is regrettably at odds with previously cherished progressive values.

    Liberal values, yes, progressive values, not really. For a while, there was some overlap, but there have been tensions from the very beginning. See Oliver Wendell Holmes. There are just more tensions now that progressivism has internalized post-modernist critiques of liberalism.

    1. I think that’s a pretty useful distinction, one that people can wrap their minds around at least.

      I grew up being taught a liberalism that celebrated the right of Nazis to march, etc. This stuff is foreign to me.

  19. That’s it. I’m throwing in the towel. Young progressives are morons.

    1. Young progressives are morons.

      In a really weird coincidence, old ones are too. I wonder what they have in common other than red diapers?

      1. The young ones do seem to be breeding a special brad of stupidity. I’ll agree that old progressives are wrong. But they aren’t usually so stupid about it. Smart people are wrong about stuff all the time.

      2. My parents were “old progressives”, and placed a high value on free speech, even freedom of religion. Growing up in the 1950s and early 1960s was its own experience comparable to nothing we know today.

      3. Many of them are. But it’s also “progressive” to push for action against Climate Change and affordable health care for Americans. So non-progressives are morons too, by your simpleton definitions.

      4. I’m going to give Tony credit for that statement. It is completely correct.

    2. Tony’s libertarian moment?

      1. Tony’s idea of sarcasm?

  20. Snowflake is overused but this is a true snowflake reaction. Sorry babies. Rapists get lawyers. All sort of scum still have the right to representation.

    1. If it doesn’t fit, you must acquit

      1. If it doesn’t fit, you must acquit

        About twenty years ago, there was an accused child rapist on trial in a city in my area who tried to make just that argument. He claimed the act he was accused of would have been physically impossible due to the very large size of his penis, and he asked the judge to let him display it erect to the jury to prove his contention. The judge said no.

  21. Someone has to be the adult at Harvard and tell these snowflakes that if they don’t like it, they can fucking leave.

  22. “I take seriously the concerns that have been raised from members of the College community regarding the impact of Professor Sullivan’s choice to serve as counsel for Harvey Weinstein on the House community that he is responsible for leading as a faculty dean,” wrote Khurana. “I have also met with Professor Sullivan to discuss his responsibilities to the House and have communicated that the College believes that more work must be done to uphold our commitment to the well-being of our students.”

    Spoken lime a true slime-ball

    1. That’s how he got the gig. Being a slime-ball is in the job description.

  23. Rakesh Khurana is a posturing, blithering idiot.

  24. These people do understand that, should everyone refuse to defend Weinstein, that the prosecution would, ethically, grind to a halt? That we get the privilege of locking people in cages in exchange for allowing them to defend themselves.

    No defense attorney means the trial can’t proceed.

  25. So many of you in the comments saying he can get a public defender, but correct me if I’m wrong: Doesn’t part of the Miranda rights say, “You have the right to an attorney. If you cannot afford an attorney, one will be appointed to you by a court of law”. This statement implies that if you CAN afford an attorney, then you are obligated to find and pay for one yourself

    1. It would depend on how much cash/credit Weinstein has on hand. The guy was a millionaire, so I have a hard time believing that he can’t afford to pay an attorney, but guys like him are also known to throw money around out of a deep-seated inferiority complex, and it’s possible he’s broke or near bankruptcy by now.

    2. Well, that would be a loose interpretation of the warning. However, as I said above, nobody with the means to hire a competent — not to mention highly skilled — defense attorney in a case like this is going to leave his fate in the hands of a PD, no matter how high up the ladder that PD may be.

  26. Sullivan takes the principled liberal view that due process matters

    And that’s the problem right there. Young leftists believe that nothing matters other than getting the outcome they want.

    1. Then they don’t belong in law school! They must give up their spots to students who have the intellectual capacity to actually understand legal proceedings.

      1. I wouldn’t assume they don’t understand the law just because they want to subvert it.

      2. As others have said above, I think most of this is coming from undergrads. If there are any law students involved, they should be summarily expelled.

  27. As much as I despise Weinstein as the epitome of 90s-2000s champagne socialism, this is fucking ridiculous. Every single law student that signed this should either be forced to re-take Constitutional law or get their expulsion papers.

    1. I would suspect that among the law students themselves, only the wokest of the woke are agitating against their Dean.

      Sullivan is being targeted as what used to be called the “Master” of one of the residence halls, which has plenty of non-law students (I don’t know how many if any law students are at Winthrop Hall, and how many if any are seeking his resignation).

      1. Or maybe it’s Yale that changed the term “Master:”

        “The Title of “Master” in the Residential Colleges

        “The term “master,” when used to describe the role in the residential colleges, will be changed to “head of college.”

        “The use of “master” as a title at Yale is a legacy of the college systems at Oxford and Cambridge. The term derives from the Latin magister, meaning “chief, head, director, teacher,” and it appears in the titles of university degrees (master of arts, master of science, and others) and in many aspects of the larger culture (master craftsman, master builder)….

        “Not incidental to the discussion was the task of finding an alternative title that speaks to the definition and responsibilities of the office. In this respect, “head of college” is the most logical and straightforward choice. In its favor is that archival records show that “head” and “headship” were placeholders for the title in the original planning documents. Heads of college may be addressed as professor, doctor, or Mr. or Ms., as applicable or as they prefer.”

        https://bit.ly/2StCAlT

      2. Winthrop is an undergrad house. So sophomores through seniors. No law students.

      3. Well, calling him ‘master’ would sure as hell be triggering – – – – –

        1. That’s “massa”.

  28. So lawyers can only represent innocent clients? but don’t all clients claim they are innocent? I’m so confused.
    These are Harvard students, the best and brightest? OMG

  29. John Adams represented the British soldiers after Boston Massacre.
    The second president of the United States successfully DEFENDED the men who had started the opening shots of the revolutionary war.

    How far we have fallen

  30. John Adams represented the British soldiers after Boston Massacre.
    The second president of the United States successfully DEFENDED the men who had started the opening shots of the revolutionary war.

    How far we have fallen

  31. I’m no lawyer, nor did I attend Harvard Law School, but I’m fairly certain that the right to a fair trial and the right to legal representation is pretty fundamental. That goes not just for a scumbag like Weinstein but even for serial killers like Ted Bundy or Jeffrey Dahomey.

    I guess these Harvard Law kids are so damn smart they know something I don’t, and even their professors don’t. The only other possibility is they’re morons and have no business being there.

    1. You are correct. I guess Harvard Law students no longer believe in the Constitution or the rule of law. Kind of makes there being in law school an oxymoron. Yet one or more of them will someday need that protection themselves, and I bet they believe in it then.

  32. Why don’t they pronounce the Rs in Harvard? Because they stand for RETAHDED

  33. This is what happens when you play the AA/PC/diversity game. You let in the remedial and your reputation will suffer.

    ‘I go to Harvard. I started a change.org petition’ is not a good look for such such a renowned institution.

    1. People who think starting a change.org petition need to be slowly lowered into well… something. I won’t say woodchipper.

      I have nothing against petitions. The right to petition our leaders is one of our founding rights. But put your damned signature on it if you mean it! Otherwise you’re jut a filthy poseur.

    2. “You let in the remedial and your reputation will suffer.”

      Harvard is over-rated. Give me Cal Tech for vastly superior teaching and research.

  34. No sympathy for Sullivan. He’s another victim of a system he helped establish. Fuck Harvard.

  35. We may have now reached the first time in history when a student can attend Harvard and receive straight As and yet be unemployable. I now I sure as hell won’t hire anyone younger than 30 who went to college. Ever.

  36. If these idiots are the future of our country, we’re doomed. It’s impossible to know what, if anything, is going on in the minds (?) of these snowflakes, but their prospect for survival in the real world seems dim. Like them.

    1. “If these idiots are the future of our country, we’re doomed”

      Some of us will adapt and thrive under the new circumstances. Fear not, humans can be versatile and have a strong will to overcome difficulties.

    2. We were already doomed…you are just slow in recognizing the obvious.

  37. “This episode is yet more evidence that modern progressive activism is regrettably at odds with previously cherished progressive values. ”

    You’re missing the point. Leftists are not Liberals. And the feminist movement had plenty of problems with the legal system over the years. It’s probable a mistake to assume that feminists will reflexively carry water for the legal system. For centuries they were denied something so simple and basic as the vote, while the judges and lawyers did nothing to remedy the situation.

  38. Just when you think college students have hit the bottom, they pull out a backhoe.

  39. If they aren’t supposed to represent loathsome clients, there won’t be many lawyers left.

    1. Pretty much leaves just Perry Mason.

  40. Is the English translation of Veritas now “Worst & Dimmest”?
    Perhaps graduates should be enjoined from any and all government employment until they can tie their shoes?

  41. Start working at home with Google! It’s by-far the best job I’ve had. Last Wednesday I got a brand new BMW since getting a check for $6474 this – 4 weeks past. I began this 8-months ago and immediately was bringing home at least $77 per hour. I work through this link, go to tech tab for work detail.
    >>>>>>>>>> http://www.GeoSalary.com

  42. Start working at home with Google. It’s the most-financially rewarding I’ve ever done. On tuesday I got a gorgeous BMW after having earned $8699 this last month. I actually started five months/ago and practically straight away was bringin in at least $96, per-hour. visit this site right here……. http://www.2citypays.com

  43. How long till we’re back to black and white bathrooms and drinking fountains!

    1. There are already segregated dorms on some college campuses.

  44. Leftists are not Liberal

  45. Lesson to the other 319.999 million people i this country: Harvard has no value.

    1. *in

  46. I PRAY TO GOD that these idiots are charged with a felony someday soon, or at minimum a serious Civil matter, and have trouble procuring counsel

  47. The students’ requests are ridiculous. One of the benefits of a free society, however, is that people are free to associate with whoever they like; and the rest of us are able to draw whatever conclusions we wish about those associations. Personally, I think that anyone who would devote their skills and talents–even when generously compensated–to defending someone like Weinstein is morally deficient. You might justify helping Weinstein based on the hope that you would gain notoriety, or for financial reasons, or by the rationalization that you were aiding justice by giving a dirtbag the best defense possible. But none of those arguments seem compelling to me. The real question for Sullivan is: Don’t you have better things to do with your time?

  48. This is what happens when you open up higher education to people who don’t have the power of reasoning or even the ability to think on a basic level. Attending a college does not make someone intelligent. I sincerely hope none of the complainants is a law student.

  49. Snowflake fascism is an ascendant cultural meme and will remain so for perhaps another generation. The deeper question is that universities have this role in society as the distributors of credentials practically guaranteeing good careers and success (some schools more than others, obviously), and why is that, exactly?

    More and more that question will be asked in coming years. Knowledge and wisdom are no longer scarce commodities squirreled away in Ivy-covered bastions manned by faculty renowned for open minds, depth of understanding, and clarity of reasoning. Au contraire, faculties are stagnant cesspools of fashionable group think. They are not about to propose anything much based on best new evidence outside of very narrow scientific fields.

  50. Surely, they made a conscious decision to override the course of academic affairs, and to graduate her.

  51. Thanks admin for giving such valuable information through your article . Your article is much more similar to https://www.moschinooutletonlinestore.com/ word unscramble tool because it also provides a lot of knowledge of vocabulary new words with its meanings.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.