Dean Martinez's Letter to Stanford Law School Alumni

It's similar to the Stanford President's and Dean Martinez's apology to Judge Duncan Saturday, but I thought it was still useful to pass along; again, for more on the underlying situation, see the reporting by David Lat (Original Jurisdiction).

Dear SLS Alumni,

I want to thank those of you who have reached out to me and others at SLS to share your reactions to the event on March 9, 2023, hosted by the student chapter of the Federalist Society and featuring Judge Kyle Duncan of the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. Your care for SLS is evident in your messages, and in all that you do to advance and steward our school.

Freedom of speech is a bedrock principle for our community at SLS, the university, and our democratic society. Since becoming Dean in 2019, my commitment to free speech has only deepened. I firmly believe that we can and must do better to ensure that it continues even in polarized times.

In the past few years, SLS has hosted a number of events with controversial speakers on campus without incident. We are very clear with our students that, given our commitment to free expression, if there are speakers they disagree with, they are welcome to exercise their right to protest but not to disrupt the proceedings. Our disruption policy states that students are not allowed to "prevent the effective carrying out" of a "public event" whether by heckling or other forms of interruption. Consistent with our practice, protesting students are provided alternative spaces to voice their opinions freely. While students in the room may do things such as quietly holding signs or asking pointed questions during question and answer periods, they may not do so in a way that disrupts the event or prevents the speaker from delivering their remarks.

The way the event with Judge Duncan unfolded was not aligned with our institutional commitment to freedom of speech. Staff members who should have enforced university policies failed to do so and instead intervened in inappropriate ways that are not aligned with the university's commitment to free speech.

As I have shared with you all before—and will continue to affirm during my deanship—Stanford Law School is deeply committed to free speech. President Tessier-Lavigne and I have apologized to Judge Duncan. The school is reviewing what transpired and will work to ensure that protocols are in place so that disruptions of this nature do not occur again. SLS is committed to the conduct of events on terms that are consistent with the disruption policy and the principles of free speech and critical inquiry that they support.

Sincerely,

Jenny S. Martinez
Richard E. Lang Professor of Law and Dean of Stanford Law School

Comments

[Commenter_XY]

Translation: Just keep the money coming boys and girls, we aren't going to change a damned thing.

Best -
Jenny

🙂

[Commenter_XY]

PS: And isn't it just awesome that we can embarrass and humiliate FedSoc students, and they still pay us thousands of dollars each per semester until we mail them our sheepskin!.

Really the Best -
Jenny

[Dr-P]

where are the disciplinary actions to enforce EXISTING policies
- firing of administration officials involved
- expulsion of students

that alone will minimize these effects in the future

[sparkstable]

The Judge should respond the way I respond to my students when they continually break the same rule and them proclaim “I’m sorry.”

He should simply say, “No you aren’t. If you were you would change.”

And before anyone freak out... I follow that up with reassurance in their ability to be better people and give them support. But I do not accept their apology until they earn the forgiveness they claim to seek. At that point, all is good and we grow stronger.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

A similar approach in this context would be involve Stanford (1) enabling its Federalist Society members to invite Judge Duncan to campus, (2) ensuring Judge Duncan is able to speak (and that modern, reasoning, inclusive people could protest), and (3) expressly informing students (and otheres) that Judge Duncan's bigotry constitutes an affront to the values of Stanford University and that the University hopes Judge Duncan's visit to Stanford might incline him to turn away from superstition-soaked gay-bashing, race-targeting voter suppression, and the like.

A win-win solution!

[Commenter_XY]

Arthur, we completely agree. I like where you're going with this....

Tell me though, what would you do with a rabble of boorishly behaving spoiled brats?

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

I would advise them to protest more deftly, as by wearing white robes and hoods with "Judge Duncan" nametags while silently attending his presentation.

[Commenter_XY]

See, I saw you wrote that down thread. I would actually be Ok with that, Arthur. Like I said, I really like where you are going with this.

I look at that (dressing up like the Klan) the same way I look at those red Handmaid Tale Wannabes. Personally, if I saw a bunch of lily-white, liberalistas at Stanford dressed up like the Klan, I'd invite the Black Panthers to come on over and tell me what to do with these hooded (we ain't talking Masters degree hoods here) guests. Come to think of it, that could be highly entertaining. Sort of like on the job training.

You might say the spoiled little brats budding young 'lawyers to be' would get immediate practice on how to talk their way out of trouble. I would like to see that....a lot. 🙂

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

You seem extremely protective of bigots and bigotry in this context.

Why

[Commenter_XY]

Protective? Not at all, Arthur. Quite the opposite; I make them own their choice. If the spoiled little brats little lily-white liberalista darlings are dumb enough to don on white robes and hoods in 2023 America to crassly make a point, well alright then. Have at it. I merely make it more interesting by providing the little darlings with useful on the job training that they would otherwise never get in school. 🙂

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

You seem myopically focused on the protesting students in this context. Do you acknowledge that Judge Duncan is a bigot?

[Hey Skipper]

What is your evidence substantiating the charge Judge Duncan is a bigot?

[Brightly]

He doesn't have any. He's just throwing words around that he believes gives power to his own small-minded vitriol. He's been doing no more than this for years....

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

Why do you assume the protesters would be white?

This was Stanford, not a Federalist Society convention, a gathering of Republican judicial nominees, or the Volokh Conspiracy.

[Commenter_XY]

Arthur, did you see the video? LMAO. = Why do you assume the protesters would be white? This was Stanford

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

I did not monitor the protesters.

Why do you object strenuously to decent people calling a bigot a bigot? Do you deny Judge Duncan is a bigot? Or do you believe he is a special bigot who deserves special treatment?

[Brightly]

Silly question. Arthur never checks facts.

[Brightly]

You seem rather cavalier in your ignorance about what a bigot really is.

[Theendoftheleft]

Are you an evolutionary dud faggot, Rev? Why do you assume that contempt for you, and a recognition of your inequality/inferiority, must be a function of ignorance and bigotry?

Once American hegemony ends, and China, the Islamic world, and the Global South's values become far more powerful, will you go back into the closet?

[Dr. Ed 2]

ME too...

And I thought I had a dark side....

[the questing vole]

From what I can tell the values of Ms. Kirkland are sodomy, pederasty, the genital mutilation of children, baby-killing, hatred of whitey, hatred of Christians, concern for deadbeats and criminals, and promotion of general intellectual vacuity. I don't think that Stanford has arrived there yet, but their DIE token certainly has.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

the genital mutilation of children

I oppose all genital mutilation involving children, including the barbaric, disgusting practice of circumcision.

I also don't think much of people who claim to teach at shitty religious schools yet feel entitled to snipe at Stanford.

[the questing vole]

I assume that your singling out of 'genital mutilation' for exclusion means that you endorse my characterization of your other values.

And, by the way, I do not teach at a university affiliated with a religion of any sort, and I am not religious. I teach at a large public R1. It isn’t a particularly good one, but, then again, there aren’t many quality institutions of higher learning in this country (and there never have been).

I do know Stanford quite well because my brother went to graduate school there (in biochemistry), and I did not 'snipe' at Stanford in this post but at their dopish DIE token.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

I teach at a large public R1.

If that is true, do you have the self-awareness to recognize that your faculty and administration colleagues disrespect you, find your views repulsive, wish you would leave, and intend to avoid hiring anyone like you again?

[the questing vole]

There are there are two different sorts of answer to your question. First, unlike most leftist academics, I am a professor not a preacher, and the students have no notion of my hot political opinions because my opinions are not relevant to teaching them Plato, Aristotle, et al., and, while my colleagues are well aware of my absolutely true and accurate characterizations of DIE and affirmative action, I don't talk politics with almost any of them either and, like most academics, they don't concern themselves with other human beings anyway.

Second, since there are education, nursing, business, and criminal justice colleges at my university, many of my colleagues are morons who know nothing about philosophy or the arts and sciences generally, and so I don't care what they think of me. In addition, all university administrators turn in their brains when appointed to admin duties, so, once again, I don't give a damn what they think.

I hope that this helps you sleep well tonight.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

and the students have no notion of my hot political opinions

Highly unlikely. Guys like you find it too tough to keep it bottled up, and young people these days have exquisite bullshit detectors when it comes to right-wing bigots.

They know you are a disaffected, stale-thinking right-wing misfit.

[the questing vole]

I am most certainly happy to be a disaffected misfit. You have once again stumbled on something clever.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

That is a recognition (or acknowledgement) most Volokh Conspiracy fans will never achieve. Most of them — like more than one Conspirator — seem unable to apprehend or acknowledge that they are at-the-fringe malcontents.

Congratulations.

[Brightly]

A word salad of projection.

[Brightly]

This is just your hate-based make-believe talking.

[Theendoftheleft]

Once more people in the United States come to understand that academic hiring isn't just rigged, but also that it's a political effort to consolidate power and narrative control (one could talk about Foucauldian notion of 'episteme' here), do you think the American political right will shoot up your entire faculty?

[Brightly]

"I oppose all genital mutilation involving children, including the barbaric, disgusting practice of circumcision."

Straw Man.

[Theendoftheleft]

Once the Islamic world sees that your side's 'right to bodily integrity' bullshit isn't just a form of cultural imperialism, but a tool to try to subvert Islam, do you think that you, as an academic (ie, a cheap American imperialist 'progressive' propagandist), will become subject to a fatwa or religious violence?

In your efforts to commit cultural genocide thus, do you think it would be fair to hold you legally accountable in Islamic jurisdictions for this?

[Brightly]

Another win would be properly identifying that Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland's bigotry constitutes an afront to the values of any reasonable person.

[Bored Lawyer]

Whishhhht. Whirrr. Whishhhht. Whirrr.

(That's the sound of the s--t hitting the fan.)

[TwelveInchPianist]

Talk is cheap. IIRC this is the same dean that allowed her university to put a student's diploma on hold for criticizing the federalist society.

"The school is reviewing what transpired and will work to ensure that protocols are in place so that disruptions of this nature do not occur again."

All they have to do is apply their policies and punish the offenders..

[Ghost of Patrick Henry]

Translation - nothing will be done to anyone involved. Next time it happens, same statement will be issued and nothing will be done. Lather, rinse, repeat. Until free speech ends and the Brownshirts have won.

[Alpheus W Drinkwater]

Nothing done? Do you have any idea how many angry blog posts there have been about this incident?

[Mr. Bumble]

Did I miss the part where the DEI queen dean is going to be fired?

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

Should a law school fire a professor (rather than merely apologizing) for, say, engaging in viewpoint-driven censorship and bigot-hugging conduct at a blog that prominently highlights association with that institution?

[The Margrave of Azilia]

Why should they hold him accountable for the stuff you post?

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

I do not recall the UCLA dean apologizing for anything I did.

[grb]

Call me a crazy dreamer, but I can imagine a "libertarian forum" where the repeated efforts of DeSantis to use state power to muscle out unwanted or unpopular speech gets one-tenth the attention of this brouhaha.

(cue John Lennon music in the background)

[The Margrave of Azilia]

Go to the Reason Magazine side of the site, you’ll get all the DeSantis-is-bad articles you want.

https://reason.com/search/desantis/

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

#KissingDeSantAss

[the questing vole]

The cut-and-paste is back, so the catamites are obviously not yet in their cages.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

If you didn't like repetition, you wouldn't stay at this blog for more than a week or so.

[the questing vole]

I actually don't mind repetition. Philip Glass and Steve Reich are two of my favorite composers. And you are one of my favorite posters, but I'm always disappointed when you mail it in like this.

[bevis the lumberjack]

Are you actually asserting that DeSantis bullshit hasn’t been discussed on here tens of times? Seriously?

And you think people on the right have a victim complex.

[grb]

I have this Stanford Thing at four posts & counting. A safe bet on the over-under anticipates several more to come, topping out at perhaps six to eight. So let’s set aside the question of weight (kiddie rudeness vs a systematic campaign by government to suppress and/or punish unpopular speech) and just consider numbers. Do I believe each incident of DeSantis using government to manage speech has been blessed by six to eight posts?

I don’t know. Given the number of times RD has tried enforce his speech preferences or punish enemies who obstinately refuse to comply, that resulting multiplication goes well beyond my available fingers and toes. But I suspect not, because it would be a very, very large number.

(that said, I’m math-challenged, so could be wrong)

[bevis the lumberjack]

What DeSantis did to entities in his state like Disney (although I find Disney awful these days) and the Rays sucks. It’s un American.

What the Stanford DEI official did to the judge and the students who wanted to hear him speak sucks. It’s unamerican.

I don’t even want to debate which is worse. I don’t know and I don’t care. Both are offensive to liberty as stand alone actions and each should be independently condemned for that reason.

[Nige]

Civil protest is unAmerican? Agree or disagree, sometimes it's in a good cause and sometimes in a bad cause, but it's as American as apple pie.

It's not really a debate, which is worse, is it?

[TwelveInchPianist]

Civil Protest in a non-public forum with the intent of silencing someone you disagree with is un-American, yes.

If the students wanted to express themselves, they could have reserved their own space and held their own event.

[Nige]

You might not like it, but it is very American. Not uniquely, of course, it's probably a rare country that doesn't have people indulging in that carry-on.

[Sarcastr0]

Unamerican!

Love how bad isn't enough gotta go for the gusto.

Shouting down speakers is bad. A vice to be socialized against.
But it's also been going on forever, and will go on forever.

At least you're not calling for these new Hitlers going to Stanford to be shot.

[The Margrave of Azilia]

As Dean Martin[ez] says, everybody loves somebody,

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z-2_OstpR5c

…and it’s not surprising that sometimes, everybody seems to hate somebody, as in this incident.

But almost everybody loves…that which the alumni are in a position to give or withhold. Stanford needs a little “Money From Home” (although certainly not in the way the movie summary describes):

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0046087/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1

[Sarcastr0]

Looking forwards to another round of these students are all Berias, and barbarians, and should be expelled criminally charged less we all fall into barbarism who do not respect the law of hospitality.
All thanks to DEI which is the new KKK and Hitler combined, only against white people. Who will soon be hunted by Antifa.

Just incredible content these past 2 days.

[The Margrave of Azilia]

Everyone blurs together into a generic “Other” for you, don’t they?

I limited myself to the argument that, *having allowed him on campus as their guest,* they should have treated this fellow properly.

I also affirmed that a private institution can decide not to invite a speaker in the first place, so there’s no guest-host relationship to violate. Wouldn’t a non-invitation have been better than “welcoming” him to campus and then exposing him to disruption and a lengthy diatribe about how even awful horrible people like him who oppress the people and bring divisiveness to the campus have free speech?

I also freely stipulated that this guy was Judge Jeffreys 2.0 and may have deserved his treatment in a cosmic sense – I simply asserted that the university, and the people who wanted to hear what the speaker had to say, didn’t deserve it.

Of course, it’s also distressing to see these future powerbrokers take it upon themselves to violate university policy and disrupt campus events – what will the self-righteous entitled SJWs, who think rules are for other people, do once they have even more power?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nm6DO_7px1I

[Sarcastr0]

You invoked the Law of Hospitality to argue something Deep And Primal had been broken.

Your as melodramatic as the rest of them.

what will the self-righteous entitled SJWs, who think rules are for other people, do once they have even more power?
"The children now love luxury; they have bad manners, contempt for authority; they show disrespect for elders and love chatter in place of exercise!!"

You're playing a very old song that each generation plays and is wrong about.

[The Margrave of Azilia]

You got hoodwinked by a “very old” quote which isn’t very old at all.

https://quoteinvestigator.com/2010/05/01/misbehave/

What do *you* think are the duties of a host to a guest? What makes the law of hospitality less venerable and worthy of respect than, say, the right to unisex bathrooms?

[Sarcastr0]

I don't really think the law of hospitality has anything deep to say about Stanford Law School in TYOL 2023.

[The Margrave of Azilia]

Why, because courtesy and respect are outdated and reactionary in our modern New Order?

And what’s TYOL? The Year of Our Lord?

[Sarcastr0]

Yiu aren’t talking about courtesy and respect, you were talking about the shattering of WisdomOld and Deep Beyond APA free Speech.

Walking it back pretty hard, now!

[The Margrave of Azilia]

Of course it’s ancient wisdom long predating the First Amendment.

The validity of that ancient wisdom is proven by recent events – I bet Dean Martin[ez] wishes her law school had been a bit less “modern” in dealing with this situation, and that “The Wrecking Crew” didn’t try to interfere with the guest’s speech.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Wrecking_Crew_(1968_film)

[Sarcastr0]

You are back in melodrama territory.

This is minor shit.,it is not the Archstone of Humanity. Cool your jets.

[The Margrave of Azilia]

If you want to call it melodramatic, I'm simply following the example of the leaders of one of our most distinguished universities.

Starting with the DEI official's lengthy, melodramatic speech about how much it tears at her heart to allow free speech to such a horrible person as Duncan.

Then going to the Dean's melodramatic letter repudiating the acts of the DEI official:

"Freedom of speech is a bedrock principle for our community at SLS, the university, and our democratic society. Since becoming Dean in 2019, my commitment to free speech has only deepened. I firmly believe that we can and must do better to ensure that it continues even in polarized times."

Either I and Dean Martin[ez] are both being melodramatic, or we aren't. "Something's Got to Give"!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Something%27s_Got_to_Give

[Commenter_XY]

Sarcastr0, I enjoyed this exchange immensely. You lawyer guys are actually pretty funny. I chuckled as I hit each of Margrave's links. Give some props there; the links were pretty good.

Archstone of Humanity....Ok, nice one. 🙂

[Nige]

'they should have treated this fellow properly.'

But the protesters didn't invite him.

[Commenter_XY]

Nah, I don’t think these Stanford students are Berias and barbarians, Sarcastr0; that would actually be insulting and demeaning to Lavrentiy Beria and barbarians everywhere.

🙂

[The Margrave of Azilia]

A Stanford Law SJW seems to imitate Conan the Barbarian in one respect: He wants to destroy his enemies, see them driven before him, and hear the lamentations of their domestic partners.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

the lamentations of their domestic partners

That's the Volokh Conspiracy's gig.

[bevis the lumberjack]

You need to tell Dean Martinez, as you did me, that she’s full of shit and that it didn’t happen the way she believes. Tell her she needs to find better sources.

Need to get in that right away.

[Sarcastr0]

My comment wasn’t about Dean Martinez, it was about our overdramatic comentariat.

[bevis the lumberjack]

I’m paraphrasing what you said to me yesterday. Dean Martinez us taking the position that what I thought happened actually happened. To the extent you thought I was full of shit, you should think that she’s full of shit.

[Sarcastr0]

So maybe start a comment thread about this thing I didn’t say. Seems less confusing,

[Noscitur a sociis]

All you have to do is say this was bad. That's it.

[Sarcastr0]

Yes, it is bad.

Students shouted down an invited speaker. That is bad.

It does not mean all of DEI is bad. It does not mean criminal prosecutions must begin.

It does mean the bulk of commenters here are taking this to some extreme heights, that says a lot more about where the right is today than the left.

[the questing vole]

You are, strictly speaking, correct in saying that this incident doesn't mean that all DIE is bad. However, all DIE is bad, nonetheless. It's first and foremost a grift that provides jobs for uneducated imbeciles, and it is destroying higher education. If you don't realize that, then you are either too stupid (you don't seem this stupid), you are involved in the grift (I think that this might be part of the case), or you're not connected with university education (this is probably true).

[Sarcastr0]

You have lots of angry opinions about disciplines you aren’t in, that you like to present as fact.

And you love to call names.

I’m unconvinced of your authority. And professorial mindset.

[the questing vole]

I paid you a compliment by suggesting that you weren't stupid, and then you went and proved me wrong. Does a person have to be a member of a religion to criticize it? I doubt that you are so silly as to say that, but to say that one has to be (e.g.) an education professor to know that the (pseudo-)academic field of education is a barren wasteland occupied by angry, unhappy, and ignorant people is the intellectual equivalent.

Your posts are also becoming more incoherent (e.g. pedologic, pronounce, Mets). Are you drunk? Is English your second or third language? I have noted this in other comments on this thread, but 'call[ing] names' is a good one. I'm picturing myself sitting on my rocking chair and shouting 'Bill', 'George', 'Hannah'. And being 'unconvinced of [my] authority' is just as amusing. There is no question of 'authority' on an anonymous comments section, and, were you convinced of my 'authority', what would that even mean?

So, I retract my earlier comment that I didn't think that you were stupid.

[TwelveInchPianist]

"You have lots of angry opinions about disciplines you aren’t in, that you like to present as fact.

And you love to call names."

Lots of projection going on here.

[twobaylorbears]

You can have all the policies you want, but if you don't enforce them, you don't really have policies. If the dean really believes those students and admins violated the school's policies, then she needs to follow up with actual enforcement. Platitudes aren't policies.

[the questing vole]

The apology is a good start. I assume that she got an earful from both the President of Stanford and some big money alums. I didn't expect her or the President to immediately fire the stupid DIE bint because it would have meant an immediate and very public lawsuit. I would guess that, if the Dean and President receive enough heat (i.e. if enough big money alums threaten to stop donating money), a negotiated (and well-paid) exit for the affirmative action hire DIE bint will be the result. Of course, they'll just replace this stupid token with another one, so, ultimately, the morons will still be a significant presence at SLC.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

Stanford also could decline to provide a platform for bigots on campus, or at least declare without qualification that the bigotry of certain speakers is an affront to decency, modernity, and Stanford's values.

[the questing vole]

Well, if they're going to decline to provide a platform for bigots on campus, they'll have to fire the entire affirmative action hire DIE bureaucracy, so, go ahead, make my day.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

I doubt this questing vole teaches at any college -- even a fourth-tier religious school -- although I suppose it could be Prof. Amy Wax.

[the questing vole]

How many tiers are there in your ranking system? And are you suggesting that there are multiple tiers of religious colleges or are you suggesting that any religious college is necessarily fourth-tier?

By the way, Amy Wax, when she is allowed to teach by the half-wit admins at her university, teaches at an Ivy League university, not at a fourth-tier religious college. Her existence (along with Robert George, Harvey Mansfield, et al.) undermines one of your primary claims, that everyone at elite institutions is both more intelligent that everyone else and a progressive of some sort. So, you need to come up with a suitable explanation of the unicorns at elite institutions (and George is actually an orthodox Catholic, for Christ's sake).

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

Conservative-controlled schools are overwhelmingly (not without rare exception) fourth-tier or unranked hayseed factories.

They flout academic freedom, engage in strenuous discrimination across the board, enforce silly dogma, collect loyalty oaths, impose old-timey speech and conduct codes, require statements of faith, suppress science to flatter childish superstition; and teach absolute fucking nonsense. They never should have been accredited by mainstream, reasoning, modern America.

Many strong schools decided a while ago, in a perverse diversity push, to bring some movement conservatives aboard. It was a profound mistake.

[the questing vole]

So, you make no attempt to address my questions to you. And, who on this blog works for any of those institutions that you like to mention? I'm aware that you are unimpressed by Professor Blackman's place of employment, but it is a public institution and has nothing to do with your particular bêtes noires.

Your last paragraph is so laughably inaccurate that I wonder if you are allowing your stable of adolescent poofs to take over your keyboard while you nod.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

The ranking systems are not mine. The most prominent includes four tiers, then a shambling collection of mostly conservative-controlled campuses labeled unranked.

The Conspirators do not operate schools -- they are merely employees with little or no policy authority -- and have generally chosen not to associate with conservative-controlled campuses. Which says a lot about what they think of conservative ideas and performance in education.

[David Nieporent]

We are very clear with our students that, given our commitment to free expression, if there are speakers they disagree with, they are welcome to exercise their right to protest but not to disrupt the proceedings.

Um, apparently they were not very clear at all with their students on that point.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

A better course than the "shout-down" stuff for protesters would be to attend wearing white robes and hoods with "Judge Duncan" nametags.

Judge Duncan gets to speak, the affront to Stanford's values is noted, and everyone should be happy.

[the questing vole]

Or, they could have all arrived in blackface singing 'Mammy'. Judge Duncan would have instantly attempted to lynch them all, and, thusly, his perfidy would have been exposed.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

I doubt Judge Duncan would have lynched anyone.

He is a federal judge.

He would have told the Federalist Society members to do it.

[Sarcastr0]

My school was quite clear about no underage drinking too.

[Brett Bellmore]

Doesn't mean diddly squat without firings and kids being kicked out of the school, or at least put on academic leave for a year.

[Sarcastr0]

Hanging's too good for 'em. Burning's too good for 'em!
They should be torn into little bitsy pieces and buried alive!

Just incredible pedological and de-escalation techniques right here.

[the questing vole]

Does a pedogogue need to be a pedologue?

[TwelveInchPianist]

"Just incredible pedological and de-escalation techniques right here."

Um, what pedological and de-escalation techniques do you think would prevent this from happening again?

[The Margrave of Azilia]

It seems a bit...melodramatic...to compare a 1-year suspension with being hanged or burnt.

[Sarcastr0]

I am using hyperbole, the rhetorical device. You are being sincere, and that’s how you stumble into ridiculous pronounce,Mets about the Law of Hospitality,

[The Margrave of Azilia]

The main difference is you're wrong and I'm right.

[the questing vole]

I believe that 'pronounce, Mets' is something that the media relations director of the New York baseball team in Queens tells the players at the beginning of each season.

[ragebot]

The simple solution to unruly students

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ycOP4i8UFec

[Nige]

Or ignore the frothing anti-university right wingers and just give 'em a slap on the wrist because what they did wasn't actually all that bad.

[SKofNJ]

Without punishment, it is encouragement.

[WillDD]

I like the band Friends of Dean Martinez a lot. The law school friends of Dean Martinez not so much.

[ragebot]

Well this is bodes well for the libturds at SLS.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/hundreds-of-silent-masked-students-surround-stanford-law-dean-for-apology-to-heckled-federal-judge-eerie/ar-AA18DdDJ?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=6eca93b13fd04748a0f1073af20ed31c&ei=23