Ed Whelan Profile picture
Mar 10 10 tweets 4 min read
With the acquiescence of @StanfordLaw administrators, Stanford law students yesterday shouted down Fifth Circuit judge Stuart Kyle Duncan at a scheduled event on topic of “The Fifth Circuit in Conversation with the Supreme Court: Covid, Guns, and Twitter." 1/
@StanfordLaw In email before event, Stanford DEI dean Tirien Steinbach stated support of right of students to protest event, "in keeping with University policies ... against disrupting speakers."

All good. Except she and 4 other administrators at event allowed gross disruption. 2/
@StanfordLaw Steinbach in fact fanned the flames, both in her email and at the event. Her email quoted with evident approval an absurd summary of Duncan's record. And in remarks at event, she said Duncan "literally denies the humanity of people" and told him "your work has caused harm." 3/ Image
@StanfordLaw After drowning out made it impossible for Judge Duncan to proceed, Steinbach delivered prepared remarks that berated Duncan and sided with protestors: "your advocacy, your opinions from the bench, land as absolute disenfranchisement of their rights." 4/
@StanfordLaw Steinbach stated Stanford's policy on free speech even as she repeatedly called it into question. So Stanford has DEI administrator who won't support Stanford's policies on free speech and who made only token effort to stop gross disruption. 5/
@StanfordLaw From what I hear, Stanford law culture is as bad as Yale's, perhaps even worse. Lefty students are viciously abusive of Federalist Society student leaders. A few years ago, a federal judge was spat on. 6/
@StanfordLaw Stanford, I'm told, filmed the entire event. So let's see if it makes the video public soon, and let's see if there are any consequences, especially for DEI dean Steinbach, for violation of university policies. 7/
Here's video of Stanford DEI dean Steinbach's remarks slamming Judge Duncan and setting forth university policy on free speech while calling its soundness into question and stating that it might need to be reconsidered. /8

Not that it matters under free-speech principles or Stanford's stated policy, but protestors had no objection to Judge Duncan's topic. With support of DEI dean, these emotionally pampered crybullies instead claimed that his presence on campus made them feel unsafe. 9/
Given how ACLU has abandoned its commitment to free speech, it's perhaps not surprising that DEI dean Steinbach's previous position was chief program officer at ACLU of Northern California. 10/

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh

Keep Current with Ed Whelan

Ed Whelan Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!


Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @EdWhelanEPPC

Mar 11
NEWS: Stanford President and Law-School Dean Apologize to Judge Duncan nationalreview.com/bench-memos/st… Read apology letter here and Judge Duncan's acceptance and commentary. 1/
Apology by Stanford president and law school dean faults DEI dean Tirein Steinbach: “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.” 2/
Interesting to see that apology's characterization of Steinbach's conduct differs markedly from Dean Martinez's statement yesterday ("well-intentioned" effort at "managing the room ... went awry"). Perhaps explains why Stanford *president* co-signed letter. 3/
Read 7 tweets
Mar 11
So here (courtesy of @DavidLat) is Stanford law dean Jenny Martinez's statement to Stanford law students about yesterday's event in which Judge Kyle Duncan was shouted down. Let's count what's missing. 1/

(Fuller background on incident here: nationalreview.com/bench-memos/cr…) ImageImage
@DavidLat 1. It's clear from Dean Martinez's statement of policy that the students who disrupted Duncan's speech violated that policy. But she doesn't actually say so, much less deliver any sort of scolding or promise of punishment. 2/
@DavidLat 2. No, Dean Martinez, "attempts at managing the room" did not go "awry." There were no such attempts, much less "well-intentioned" ones. Rather, your DEI dean was intent on chastising Judge Duncan. Have you actually watched the video?
vimeo.com/806801455/16c7… 3/
Read 7 tweets
Jan 6
I'm sure that I will have a lot more to object to in yesterday's South Carolina supreme court ruling (3-2) against heartbeat law, but I'll start by complaining that court doesn't put page numbers on its 147 pages. sccourts.org/opinions/HTMLF…
Also very strange to have footnotes numbered serially across the five separate opinions. So, for example, first footnote in Kittredge dissent is numbered 68. (But maybe this helps navigate through unnumbered pages.)
Interesting to see South Carolina chief justice Beatty begin his opinion by embracing one of the stupidest Supreme Court statements ever (from Eisenstadt). Ah, yes, "privacy" has no possible meaning if it doesn't include abortion.

(His opinion doesn't improve after that.)
Read 7 tweets
Jan 4
Article correctly notes that OLC opinion can't preclude prosecution under state laws. But even "assurances against federal prosecution" are more limited than article suggests. 1/
It's not clear that OLC opinion properly states the intent element under 18 USC 1461. But on assumption that it does, federal prosecutors, in this or later administration, are free to form own judgment on what evidence satisfies it. 2/
Statute of limitations for violation of 18 USC 1461 is five years (extending into next presidential term). Plus, there is massive RICO liability. nationalreview.com/bench-memos/ri… So shippers of abortion drugs proceed at great risk. 3/
Read 5 tweets
Dec 31, 2022
En banc Eleventh Circuit, in opinion by Judge Barbara Lagoa, soundly rules that separating school bathrooms based on sex does NOT violate the Equal Protection Clause or Title IX. media.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/f…
11th Circuit: Equal Protection claim fails because policy does not discriminate against transgender students. Title IX claim fails because Title IX allows schools to separate bathrooms by sex.
On Equal Protection claim: School's bathroom policy advances important objective of protecting students' privacy. Cites Ginsburg opinion in VMI as well as lots of other rulings.

Majority rejects dissent's position that Adams, a girl who IDs as a boy, somehow really is a boy.
Read 9 tweets
Dec 19, 2022
Gotta say it's embarrassing that Harvard Law Review would publish a piece with this text and footnote concerning Kennedy v. Bremerton. Text claims Court held something that footnote says it didn't. And claim in footnote about facts is wildly wrong. nationalreview.com/bench-memos/le… ImageImage
The substantive errors in Mark Lemley's piece are much more troublesome, but it's strikingly sloppy that he and his editors couldn't even keep proper track of the parts of his essay, confusing Part II with Part I-F and Part III with Part II. ImageImageImage
On West Virginia v. EPA and "major questions," here's another instance in which Lemley misstates a holding in text and adds a footnote that contradicts his misstatement. A competent treatment would address this coherently in text. Image
Read 10 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!


0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy


3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!