"Strangers on the Internet" Podcast Ep. 39: Prof. Christa Laser on Her #metoolaw Sexual Harassment Allegations

In this exclusive interview, Prof. Laser tells the full story for the first time about her allegations against ex-GMU prof Joshua Wright

The 39th episode (Apple Podcasts link here and Spotify link here) of "Strangers on the Internet" features patent law scholar and former BigLaw attorney Prof. Christa Laser from the Cleveland State University College of Law.

On this Breaking News episode, I interview Christa about her sexual harassment allegations against just-departed George Mason University antitrust law professor and former FTC Commissioner Joshua Wright. In a tweet (accompanied by a screenshotted email) viewed by hundreds of thousands of people, Christa described how Josh asked her out on a date while GMU hiring chair when he knew that she was desperate to remain in the DC area to maintain custody of her two children. Christa's tweet prompted multiple former students and employees of Josh's to come out publicly with allegations of his having (successfully) pressured them into inappropriate sexual relationships when he held their careers in his hands.

Christa and I discuss the possible professional repercussions against female "troublemakers" who call out rule- and law-breaking at their institutions. We also analyze how and why legal academia breeds predatory and discriminatory behavior, how allies can help, and what reform might look like in light of this #metoo moment.

Note: According to a statement printed in the media by Lindsay McKasson, counsel to Joshua Wright at Binall Law Group "all allegations of sexual misconduct are false," "These false allegations are being made public after unsuccessfully demanding millions of dollars behind closed doors," and "We look forward to total vindication in court." According to a tweet by Christa, "I don't appreciate that his attorney falsely suggests we are all lying (1/2 was in writing!) & want $ (this is a lie--I only want him gone)."

Prof. Christa Laser

Comments

[Dan Schiavetta]

Serious accusations. Frivolous photo.

[Dilan Esper]

That's Prof. Laser's official faculty photo.

https://onlinelearning.csuohio.edu/faculty/christa-laser

And there's nothing wrong with it.

[kotodama]

Have to agree with Dilan on this one.

capt is having a crisis because some women don’t seem to know their places.

[Dan Schiavetta]

She looks like a giggling teenager on her bed thrilled with her new negligee. Distracts from the seriousness of whatever it is she is saying and in particular is a disservice to the impact of her accusations. Also shows a lack of self awareness.

[Snorkle]

It display a lack of interest in what self-appointed clothing cops think.

Waiting for you to proclaim she should smile more.

[Dr. Ed 2]

That's clothing you would wear on a date when you are trying to generate sexual interest in your body. It would be like a male professor wearing a muscle shirt (also sleeveless) or perhaps a regular shirt unbuttoned halfway to his navel, showing off his chest hair.

If you want to be considered an equal to the guys, you wear a suit, just like they do. Skirt below the knee.

[Philistine]

Do you really think that a sleeveless muscle shirt or a regular shirt halfway unbuttoned is what people actually wear on dates?

[Dan Schiavetta]

Dr. Ed:
agreed!

[kotodama]

I’m flabbergasted to hear that a garbage FTC commissioner and joke of a legal “scholar” was also a scumbag in his professional relationships, said nobody ever.

[Cheerio]

"...asked her out on a date while GMU hiring chair..."

I realize many organizations have policies against dating subordinates, and that's a reasonable policy to have...but is violating such a policy necessarily sexual harassment? Doesn't it matter whether or not there was any retaliation or an implied threat, etc.?

Seems like just because somebody has power over someone doesn't necessarily mean that said power is being abused. We'd need more info to know that...

[Snorkle]

Much like corruption, the appearance of tolerating sexual harassment matters - it can have an effect on others' willingness to work there, so it can damage institutional reputation. So there's a case to be made for preferring to err on the side of inflexibility.

I personally don't see a problem - jobs impose all sorts of limits in return for the privilege of having one. "Don't fuck subordinates" just doesn't seem like that difficult of a rule to me.

[Cheerio]

Well, I acknowledged that it's a reasonable policy for an organization to have. What I'm questioning is just whether it should be characterized as "sexual harassment" (vs. "violation of a dating policy" or some such...) without evidence that that's what's actually going on.

After all, the guy's very message that was screenshot there appeared to indicate that there would be no pressure or hard feelings whatsoever if she chooses to decline his invitation...

[Goju]

Much like the guy who admires your place of business and hopes nothing happens to it.

[Cheerio]

If there's evidence of any such insincerity/sarcasm, then by all means please present it. That would be quite relevant.

[ReaderY]

Now that Professor Laser is in the public eye having made serious accusations where her credibility and the public’s perception of her are going to be important, it might be prudent for her, it might be in her interests, it might help her and her message, to replace her current faculty photo with something where she has a somewhat more serious demeanor and somewhat more formal dress.

[Cheerio]

"I don't appreciate that his attorney falsely suggests we are all lying..."

It's fairly typical in *any* area of law for each side to argue that the other side's version is less accurate/credible/etc. That's what court cases exist to adjudicate, and until they do so, the attorneys' jobs are to advocate for their respective clients.

We really can't start faulting lawyers for doing their standard (essential?) job function of advocating that their client's position in a given dispute is the correct one.

[Squirrelloid]

I don't understand all the hate for her dress. It's a nice, reasonably formal dress. It's not trashy or overtly sexualized. You could wear something like that to church 20 years ago.

Oh what am I saying, she's a pretty woman. She must be a witch. I'll get the scales, and we can see if she weighs the same as a duck.

[Dan Schiavetta]

Most attorneys, male or female, choose a photo where it looks like they’re about to stand up in court and begin serious advocacy, starting out in a respectful, authoritative voice, “Your honor, . . .”

This one looks like she’s about to stand up, smooth her dress, giggle and say “OMG — is my lipstick too glossy”?