Thread by @kcjohnson9

The latest in a series of extraordinary @conor64 essays on TIX/due process issues: "Harvard faculty members who are also defense attorneys should not be subject to 'climate' investigations just because they represent unpopular clients."
theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/…

The piece features very strong (& richly deserved) criticism of Harvard's handling of this issue from @JeannieSuk: "A major illiberal turning point in universities ,...remarkable because it’s the Harvard administration acting in its official capacity, not just some stray voices."

Also biting criticism of Harvard's conduct from HLS professor Janet Halley: "The 'climate survey' technique is a dangerous precedent as a matter of employment rights and as a threat to academic freedom. It’s a thinly veiled version of the heckler’s veto."

As both Halley & Suk Gersen note, Harvard's response has implications in the TIX process as well: the arguments marshalled against Sullivan could apply to any professor who assists an acc'd student in the TIX process--or even one, like @laurakipnis, who critiques the TIX process.

Catherine MacKinnon: lawyer who represents a client is "siding" with client's conduct & Sullivan's priority should be as TIX reporter. W/mandatory reporting policies, this line of argument would suggest that any professor who criticitizes TIX policy has an "equality question."