2-hr. hearing in latest of @BrownUniversity acc'd student lawsuits just concluded, addressing univ's motion for summary judgment. Tough questions from Judge McConnell for acc'd student's lawyer, Susan Kaplan, on both racial discrimination & TIX claims.
By contrast, Judge McConnell had only a couple of Qs, both mild, for Brown's lawyer, @StevenMRichard. Sense from the hearing that this decision will likely be a victory for Brown.
And kudos to @USDC_RI for setting up an easy-access Zoom hearing that allowed the argument to be easily followed.
On specific counts, Judge McConnell seemed most intrigued w/IIED claim. On others, repeatedly noted that acc'd student seemed to have accepted Brown's decisions at the time; and Qs implied that he saw racial discrimination claims as speculative only.
My notes from hearing below.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Judge Lippman's report about CUNY's antisemitism procedures is now out.
"[R]ecently there has been an alarming number of unacceptable antisemitic incidents targeting members of the CUNY community."
"However, some faculty can and should do more to promote dialogue between those with differing viewpoints on critical issues and to encourage peaceful solutions to disagreements rather than inflame conflict, which we often found to be the case."
Lippman notes that most CUNY students aren't in any way hateful: "Antisemitism and discrimination that exist on CUNY campuses are carried out by a small, vocal minority of individuals."
The Columbia antisemitism support suggests a deeply flawed campus culture: “One student captured more than 750 antisemitic online posts written by Columbia students and organizations.”
"Students reported being told 'Kill your fucking self. And I’ll fucking kill you.'”
“we have heard that students have been referred to counseling and psychological services—which they correctly understood as implying that they just need to learn to accept and cope with antisemitic experiences.”
Striking number of instances of physical assault against Jewish students.
Quite an opening anecdote in this richly reported @TheAtlantic piece on Stanford after Oct. 7.
Interesting analysis here--which I'm not sure fully explains *why* the average student has changed (or why the average student wasn't horrified by the events of Oct. 7).
Fascinating excerpt w/prominent anti-Israel prof--who either dissembles about his position or is simply Orwellian in his language.
The key argument in antisemitism lawsuit filed today against @MIT: "MIT tolerated discriminatory, harassing speech that it had expressly not tolerated in other comparable situations."
Lawsuit alleges selective enforcement claim--rules enforced against Jewish and pro-Israel students but not against non-Jewish and anti-Israel students.
Allegation re harassment of Jewish profs is troubling.
Complaint unsurprisingly cites troubling incident where MIT acknowledged that anti-Israel protesters violated MIT rules, but then declined to move forward on discipline due to "visa" issues.
A short thread, with audio, on 1964, the anomaly in @JMilesColeman's excellent piece on Senate/presidential ticket-splitting, which usually has benefited Dems.
In 1964, the GOP won six Senate races (CA, DE, HI, NE, PA, VT) in states carried by LBJ.
For LBJ the most consequential was Delaware: “I want to beat this son-of-a-bitch [John] Williams.”
LBJ was even willing to do a deal with RFK (clip below) where LBJ agreed to extra time campaigning for RFK in NYC if RFK mobilized civil rights leaders against Wiliams.
In three other states—CA, HI, PA—party divisions undid the Dems. PA was especially notable—legal fights over an exceptionally close primary weakened nominee Genevieve Blatt, who would have become the first woman elected to the Senate who hadn’t succeeded her husband in Congress.