Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

Georgetown Law Student Protesters Demand Ilya Shapiro Firing, Reparations, Place To Cry, End To “Originalist” Center

Georgetown Law Student Protesters Demand Ilya Shapiro Firing, Reparations, Place To Cry, End To “Originalist” Center

There seems to be a pre-existing unhappiness at Georgetown Law that erupted with Shapiro’s tweets the spark. “One student floated the idea of defunding the Center for the Constitution…. Another pressed Treanor on why the Center existed at all, given the originalist views of its director, Randy Barnett.“

Something is not right at Georgetown Law Center, and that something does not appear to be caused by Ilya Shapiro or his tweets. The more I look into this, the more there seems to be a pre-existing unhappiness at Georgetown Law that was ready to explode, and the tweets were the spark.

I covered the controversy yesterday, Profile In Cowardice: Georgetown Law Dean Bill Treanor Suspends Conservative Legal Scholar Ilya Shapiro. Please see that post for the background.

Spreading Pushback To Shapiro Suspension

Pushback came in a letter organized by The Foundation For Individual Rights In Education, signed (as of this writing) by 148 law faculty (including me):

Dear Dean Treanor:

We understand that some have called for Ilya Shapiro to be fired from his position as Executive Director of the Georgetown Center for the Constitution, because of his tweet criticizing President Biden’s pledge to appoint a black woman as a Justice. We think such a firing—or subjecting Shapiro to disciplinary action of any kind based on his tweet—would be contrary to basic academic freedom principles, which Georgetown rightly applies (1) to “all faculty,” including “lecturer[s]” such as Shapiro, and not just tenure-track faculty, and (2) to “professional service” and “all the domains of [faculty] academic activity,” which would include public commentary by public intellectuals, and not just “research” and “teaching.”

We agree that the reference in the tweet to “a lesser black woman” was a poor way of expressing the message (and Shapiro’s apology seems to agree as well). “[Sri Srinivasan] doesn’t fit into the latest intersectionality hierarchy so we’ll get [a less-qualified] black woman” is presumably what Shapiro meant to say. But setting aside that one mistake—which should not be seen as a fireable offense—the substance of the message, which is that Sri Srinivasan is the most qualified progressive nominee, and that it’s wrong for the President to pass him over because of race and sex, is a position that is most certainly protected by academic freedom principles of “[f]ree inquiry and unconstrained publication of the results of inquiry.”

To be sure, the substantive position about the President’s pledge, and about the relative qualifications of the various possible appointees, is not a position that all of us endorse. Indeed, some of us have publicly disagreed with it.

But academic freedom protects Shapiro’s views, regardless of whether we agree with them or not. And debate about the President’s nomination, and about whether race and sex play a proper role in such nominations more generally, would be impoverished—at Georgetown and elsewhere—if this view could not be safely expressed in universities. Indeed, to the extent that people do think it’s proper for a President to promise to fill a position with a member of a particular group, they can only have real confidence in that conclusion if they know that the contrary view can be freely supported and discussed, and has been found unpersuasive on the merits rather than silenced by fear of firing. That is famously the way academic discourse about science operates. And it is true for moral and political judgments as well.

More broadly, firing Shapiro for expressing his views will send a message to others in Georgetown—both faculty (and especially untenured faculty) and students—that debate about matters having to do with race and sex is no longer free; that the promises of academic freedom are empty; and that dissent from the majority views within the law school is not tolerated. That will chill far more than just honest discussions of this particular Presidential nomination.

Pushback also came from some unexpected leftist places, like Adam Serwer:

“I’ve made my feelings about what he said clear but it’s impossible for academic institutions to fulfill their missions if they fire or punish people under circumstances like these.”

And Jeet Heer:

“Shapiro’s comments were vile but well within the parameters of academic free speech. The university is betraying fundamental principles here.”

There also was support for Georgetown’s move, such as from attorney Alex Sanyshyn who made clear firing was what he wanted:

Yes, when I tag @GeorgetownLaw  in tweets pointing out Ilya Shapiro’s long history of racism, sexism, and general bigotry, I am demanding that they fire him. Glad we cleared that up.

Georgetown adjunct law professor Joshua Matz, a private practice attorney who was impeachment counsel to Democrats in the case against Trump, tweeted his support for the Dean:

As an adjunct professor at @GeorgetownLaw, I strongly agree with Dean Treanor Ilya Shapiro’s statements were despicable, ignorant and racist Statements like this cause and perpetuate real harm—and are especially unforgivable from someone entrusted with the opportunity to teach

Protests And Sit-In Lead To More Demands

Today, law students staged a sit-in, as reported by Nate Hochman at National Review:

On the heels of a Georgetown Black Law Student Association petition calling for Shapiro’s termination, a message went out last night announcing that “a coalition of Georgetown Law Students will gather for a sit-in calling for the immediate termination of Ilya Shapiro and for the administration to address BLSA demands”:

Apart from the sit in, students met in an auditorium with Dean Bill Treanor. Hochman was denied entry, but caught the second half of the meeting on a live stream. The student demands revealed not just anger at Shapiro, but also hostility to an “originalist” institute even being on campus (emphasis added):

A chastened-looking Treanor spent more than an hour answering questions from what appeared to be the BLSA leadership team in a closed auditorium. The dean, striking an apologetic tone, echoed the language of the activists in the crowd, assuring the assembled students that he was “appalled” by the “painful” nature of Shapiro’s tweets and promising to “listen,” “learn” and ultimately “do better.” But he also seemed to be attempting to appease the students without committing to any definitive disciplinary action for Shapiro. “Since we’re a private institution, the First Amendment doesn’t apply to us,” he said. “It’s not the First Amendment that’s the university’s guideline.” But “on the other hand, the university does have a free speech and expression policy which binds us.”

The crowd was skeptical, directly criticizing Treanor’s messaging as “dishonest” and pushing for more aggressive action against Shapiro. One student floated the idea of defunding the Center for the Constitution “if, worst-case scenario,” Shapiro “were allowed to remain,” suggesting that Shapiro’s tweets can’t “be divorced” from the Center: “If Shapiro is there, then his ideas and his rhetoric will be the Center,” she insisted. Another pressed Treanor on why the Center existed at all, given the originalist views of its director, Randy Barnett. “Why was it created?” she asked. “Because so far it seems like it has done more harm than good.”

“You can do as much diversity training as you want with staff,” she continued. “But I feel like that Center has a certain ideology . . . so I really want you to defend why we really need it, beyond, like, you know, free speech, and beyond diversity of opinion. I really want us to think critically about why we still need it.”

Treanor said he thinks the Center is “important,” but quickly added that he wanted to “draw a line between conservatism and things that are racist.”

[Georgetown Law Dean William Treanor, From Instagram Story posted By BLSA]

According to Hochman, students reiterated some of their demands and added others, such as “reparations” for students and a designated place to cry (emphasis added):

At another juncture, a student demanded that the dean cover for the classes that the activists had missed as a result of the sit-in, suggesting that the move should be part of a “reparations” package for black students. She followed up by insisting that students be given a designated place on campus to cry. “Is there an office they can go to?” she asked. “I don’t know what it would look like, but if they want to cry, if they need to break down, where can they go? Because we’re at a point where students are coming out of class to go to the bathroom to cry.”

“And this is not in the future,” she added. “This is today.”

The administrators took the law student’s query seriously. “It is really, really hard to walk out of class or a meeting in tears, and you should always have a place on campus where you can go,” Dean Bailin told her. “And if you’re finding that you’re not getting the person that you want to talk to or not getting the space that you need, reach out to me anytime — anytime — and we will find you space.”

Hochman separately tweeted some of the dialogue, with video back up:

“Coming back to this reparations thing…I don’t know if it’s a couple dinners or lunches or what, but that would help us,” one activist says.

“We have food on the way,” the dean assures her.

“Oh good, okay,” she says.

Aaron Sibarium at the Free Beacon further reports (emphasis added):

“Students are going to the bathroom to cry because they are scared,” one student told William Treanor, the dean of the law school. When another student said, “We have food on the way,” Treanor responded: “We will reimburse you for that.”

The exchange captures the tone of the sit-in, with Treanor and other administrators taking a largely deferential tone toward the demonstrators. “These comments are really helpful,” Treanor said at one point, assuring students he was “appalled” by Shapiro’s tweet. “For this to be at the start of Black History Month is particularly painful. I know what a terrible burden it is, and I’m grateful for you taking the time to talk.”

Several demonstrators also mentioned an incident involving former Georgetown Law professor Sandra Sellers, who was caught on tape saying that black students tend to cluster at the bottom of their classes. “That took me away from being able to focus for a month,” a student said. “And that was during Black History Month too.”

To mark the occasion this year, one demonstrator suggested the administration send an email to “remind” white students that “they are only here because our ancestors” were enslaved. “This is something that these people need to be reminded of,” the student said.

Pre-Existing Problems At Georgetown Law

Looking at the complaints of students, it’s pretty clear that there was serious pre-existing unhappiness at Georgetown Law. Whether that unhappiness was widespread, or just among the people now complaining, I can’t tell. Ilya Shapiro didn’t cause the problems, but his tweets seemed to have provided a spark.

[Featured Image: Instagram Story posted by Georgetown BLSA]

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Comments

These are going to be lawyers? “Where can we cry?”

In fact, it’s all fake. They are the most privileged. Not to mention they would gladly inflict tears on those they don’t like, as is the case here.

    Are the dean and faculty lawyers? More like snowflakes.

      No, more like Mao’s Red Guard, or Pol Pot’s teenage killers.

      These people are dangerous, and unless we push back on them and bloody their noses, we’ll see a repeat of the “crazy white woman” riots alongside BLM goon – only this time, Merrick Garland will see we’re shot trying to defend ourselves.

      JohnSmith100 in reply to Rick. | February 2, 2022 at 7:36 am

      The nearest cesspool or sewage aeration ponds should be their designated crying locations. Better yet, toss them in, because they are sort of human, sewage.

    I think it is a huge case of projection.

    Massinsanity in reply to oldschooltwentysix. | February 2, 2022 at 2:13 pm

    Say what you might about Bill Maher but he summed this up perfectly recently when speaking about “the left”

    “the left… is made up of a small contingent that has gone mental and a large contingent that refuses to call them out for it”

    What is taking place as Georgetown, Penn, Cornell, etc, etc etc is exactly this. Why won’t these college leaders stand up and call out these cry babies for what they are? Instead they cower in fear of being called some form of ____ist which is a joke because all these ____ist terms are now meaningless they are thrown around so casually.

    Future trial transcript:

    Deputy DA (because private firms want billable hours, not tears): “You’re honor, I request a 30 minute recess.”

    Judge: “for what purpose?”

    DDA: “I need to cry, defense counsel hurt my feelings”.

I hope these cossetted children stay in school a very very long time. They don’t need to be turned loose in society.

They have a bright future working in government.

George_Kaplan | February 1, 2022 at 9:46 pm

There’s a simple solution to this. Tell the students to file out quietly, collect their belongings, and head home as they’ve been disenrolled and their tuition refunded since they clearly don’t wish to learn.

So long as institutions keep rolling over and pandering to bigots the bigotry and hate on campus is only going to exacerbate.

Appear to be auditioning for jobs with the Merrick Garland Justice Department under the warped and perverse supervision of Vanita Gupta and Kristen Clarke.

WasTaiwanese=NowFullAmerican | February 1, 2022 at 10:08 pm

Perry Mason would not be proud of today’s law schools.

There is a clear and present danger to freedom of speech and dissent at Georgetown Law School-these are the future lawyers of the US?! Shapiro should be allowed to teach and the administration should reject all of the woke demands of the students

Sad but this Georgehtown professor.’s constant attacks against President Trump and Trump’ s immigration and America first policies makes it hard to feel too sorry for him.

    Your formal surrender on the culture because you don’t like a professor is duly noted.

    When moderate conservatives are purged and they go for the few remaining professors you like (and have a much easier time) great job with your priorities.

    rebelgirl in reply to garybritt. | February 7, 2022 at 7:24 pm

    Don’t feel sorry for him anyway..just stand up for right over wrong. you don’ t have to like or approve of the guy

What we need is a virus deadlier than Ebola and more infectious than wokeness. It’s all over. Let’s cull the herd and start over.

Crybullies.
On the other hand, it’s nice knowing the coming Civil War will be a cakewalk. We can win it with tear gas.

    healthguyfsu in reply to henrybowman. | February 1, 2022 at 11:42 pm

    Tear gas caused COVID…they will run for the hills!

    JohnSmith100 in reply to henrybowman. | February 2, 2022 at 7:40 am

    Freon + heat would be more effective.

    If there is a civil war at least a million will die because of the deadliness of modern tech, it will be much bloodier for civilians to and probably have more resemblance to the Russian Civil War than the American civil war which is why no such thing is coming.

      Well, there won’t be a ‘hot’ civil war, no matter how hard the left is pushing for one. We’re already winning on the fronts that matter, and unless the GOP manages to royally screw everything up (and I don’t discount that possibility), Democrats will lose their majorities in Congress in November.

“To mark the occasion this year, one demonstrator suggested the administration send an email to “remind” white students that “they are only here because our ancestors” were enslaved. “This is something that these people need to be reminded of,” the student said.”

LOL…isn’t that the only reason you are here too???

There’s a place you can cry. It’s called your dorm room. Go find the nearest pillow and have at it.

    Colonel Travis in reply to healthguyfsu. | February 2, 2022 at 2:59 am

    100% agree. These people got into law school?

    My fear is that these infants will never grow up and take this POV into courtrooms for decades. I hope there are enough adults to kick their asses.

    I was going to say, “You already have a place to cry. It’s called ‘your mother’s basement’. Now go!”

Mandela’s Zhosa vs Zulu, and, originalist intent to mitigate their progressive conflict.

Your going to some day need to be represented by a lawyer, if you find it’s one of a Georgetown graduate walk out of the office real fast, social justice has more bearing than your problem.

    CarlosT in reply to Skip. | February 2, 2022 at 7:22 am

    If you’re ever in need of a lawyer, consider hiring an Asian or Indian man. Chances are high they’ll have had to face the strictest standards of admissions at every step of the way, even tougher than those faced by white guys.

      The Gentle Grizzly in reply to CarlosT. | February 2, 2022 at 10:56 am

      They also are unlikely to be sniveling little pants-wetting snowflaked.

        For all the value of an outdated meme (is it still 2011?) nobody in the article is a snowflake, they are weaponizing the cultures obsession with vulnerability which makes them opponents.

        Keep misunderstanding them if you want to keep losing, those students are going to graduate law school and pass the bar and heavily influence the practice of law.

The Gentle Grizzly | February 2, 2022 at 5:48 am

It’s time for a game of Grizzly Guesses.

I guess there’s not a single one of these protesting students ever held and after school or summer job.

I guess that at least most of them were never required to clean their own room, run their own laundry, or wash the family dishes after dinner each night.

I’m guessing that at least most of them spent a good portion of their youth bent over in prayer position texting the friend that was sitting across the table from them at the restaurant.

I’m guessing the very few of them made their own friends. Their parents mothers arranged play dates.

I’m guessing that at least the middle class on up kids sat in the backseat of the family vehicle watching SpongeBob SquarePants on a DVD monitor rather than looking out the window and seeing life.

/How am I doing?

    JohnSmith100 in reply to The Gentle Grizzly. | February 2, 2022 at 7:47 am

    I am guessing that only 10% or so were actually qualified, as in having appropriate SAT scores.

    I am guessing that most of them (the non-affirmative action admits, that is) are legacies.

    Grizzly guess is most likely wrong on every baseless insult.

    They unlike you understand how much the culture values vulnerability and have weaponized it to achieve an ends they want.

    Keep deliberately deluding yourself it is how to keep losing.

    By the way the university in question is hard as hell to get into it did not accept the garbage of society.

This not only institutionalizes permanent childhood as an entitlement, it represents the ultimate argument for shutting down universities as incapable of accomplishing their fundamental purpose. Are they really just going to become daycare centers for a generation of entitled obnoxious children who refuse to grow up? Is there any benefit to society to keep these universities open?

    Students are using their power to attack a professor to get him fired as part of a move to purge conservatives from campus.

    Stop pretending it is about kids not growing up it is about adults using their power against other adults.

    The best way to stop them is to start taking them seriously.

Solution to the national student loan debt problem: close these taxpayer-funded daycare centers and seize their endowments to pay off the debt. We know where the taxpayer money goes and we should take it back for failing their basic mission in civilized society.

    I’m only going to disagree on the “failing their basic mission” part. Just like the Christian universities of the past, these Progressive institutions are absolutely fulfilling their indoctrination and evangelism role. Unfortunately, the worldview they promulgate is antithetical to reality.

2smartforlibs | February 2, 2022 at 7:12 am

Again the left just doesn’t get it. Just because you don’t like it doesn’t make the speech illegal. If free speech isn’t applied equally it’s not free speech.

caseoftheblues | February 2, 2022 at 8:22 am

What the hell is wrong with them…and even worse the so called adults encouraging and supporting these virtue signaling temper tantrums

disgusting–actually more indicative of the sort of people in charge of the university not just the pampered petulance of the “students”

however his opinion was expressed, the professor is entitled to it

pity none of these snowflakes have read voltaire or, if they have, comprehended the truth of his many famous observations on freedom

    artichoke in reply to texansamurai. | February 2, 2022 at 8:35 am

    Both. These students are also disgusting. They’re adults already, now acquiring professional skills. This is how they are and will be.

Is it just Georgetown Law and a few other law schools? Or is it the whole rising generation of officers of the court? Because the latter is a dismal prospect for our society, but I suspect it’s the truer one. Or maybe just dismal for me, and I need to find a different country with different officers, to which to contribute my talents.

I certainly don’t want to help these assholes.

” Indeed, to the extent that people do think it’s proper for a President to promise to fill a position with a member of a particular group, they can only have real confidence in that conclusion if they know that the contrary view can be freely supported and discussed, and has been found unpersuasive on the merits rather than silenced by fear of firing. That is famously the way academic discourse about science operates. ”

Unfortunately, that isn’t how academic discourse about “the science” operates anymore. Not reliably so anyway. There’s woke science that gets funded, and unwoke science that doesn’t.

OwenKellogg-Engineer | February 2, 2022 at 9:32 am

These are the future lawyers and activists that will make “ownthink” a crime.

The Gentle Grizzly | February 2, 2022 at 9:50 am

I’d give them someone to cry about….!

    The mountain of debt they are incurring is the one thing that ought to merit a safe space to cry. That’s one thing I really LOVE about higher ed right now is the fact that they are charging kids through the nose for this drug called “virtue.” Honestly these years would be less destructive to their futures and better spent doing meth and robbing fellow citizens of blue city hell holes.

Actually a good argument in the matter here. Has anyone here (or any of the staff/students for that matter) ever read this?

https://harvardcrcl.org/first-amendment-on-private-campuses/

Oh what the actual hell?

Change those kids’ diapers and send them back to nursery (yup, they haven’t even graduated to preschool yet) where they belong.

The Gentle Grizzly | February 2, 2022 at 11:03 am

I’ve mentioned this in the past in other threads and at other websites, but, here goes again.

Perhaps the communist countries were right in sending virtually everyone into some sort of hard manual tasks now and then. An example is how virtually everyone was in the fields to harvest the sugar cane in Cuba.

Do the same with these kids. Farm labor. Janitorial work in hospitals or office buildings – barring union interference. Other dirty manual labor. It might give the little darlings some perspective, and to learn to appreciate what they have rather than taking it for granted.

For the record: I worked in a family business, starting with a shovel in hand, driving a medium-duty 3-axle truck, doing mechanical repairs, etc. It didn’t do me a bit of harm.

    I worked in McDonald’s. Learned a variety of lessons that aren’t what one necessarily thinks should be taught to teenagers, but real lessons nevertheless.

    I regret as a parent that similar jobs were less common and hard to find for my kids. They would have benefited from being expected to have such jobs. And the hours they could have spent learning in a real job, they were now expected to “volunteer” for some made-up goody goody task. We’re not a rich family of philanthopists. My kids need to learn to work, not to give away their scarce time.

    If you know a thing about the gulags and have any thoughts besides horror congratulations sir you are either a psychopath or an idiot, there is no third explanation.

    By the way those “kids” (in their 20s by the way) are most likely employed and are just using their status in society as “vulnerable” in a weaponized way.

    Your solving a problem that doesn’t exist and using CASTRO as a basis for how to do so is moronic.

    Some of them probably are janitors already,

    For the record they don’t care about your job history, they are trying to purge conservatives from campus and pretending they got hurt to do so.

      Heyas Danny, you seem to have a thing for going after Grizz (but in a not quite comment-removable way). So far, and I’m just getting started with my comment reading, I see at least three comments directed at him, most saying pretty much the same thing. Once really is enough. He’s a good guy and on our side.

      artichoke in reply to Danny. | February 6, 2022 at 7:49 pm

      Maybe he had in mind a system like where Mao Zedong would send all the youth to farms for a few months to learn and work for the farmers. Of all the well founded complaints against Mao, that is not one that comes up very often. It had benefits for the youth and the farmers. And there’s even a national self sufficiency aspect. Rather than letting in foreigners to work on farm (our current “system” for this is to let illegal aliens leak in, then put up with the degradation of our schools and healthcare system) it’s all done nationally.

These kids are going to be in for a surprise as the lowest people in the law firm that hires them. Working 75-100 hours a week for ten years to make the partnership track with some crusty SR partner reading them the riot act every other day, just because they can, will be enlightening for them. As will their fist interaction with a real Judge who won’t accept their BS excuses for clogging their docket or for that matter opposing counsel who are zealously adversarial and don’t mind hurting their feelings in order to prevail.

    Thank you Mr. Bush, yes those kids are going to graduate college with useless gender and racial studies degrees, corporations will refuse to hire them and they will be chastened, realize their ideology was wrong, be bashed into reality by those wonderful wonderful corporations and they will try and learn something useful -fastforward 20 years- oh wait the corporations hired them to run the corporations and the corporations went woke.

    Those “kids” are fine with hard work, they got into a highly prestigious school and if they couldn’t handle that work the school would kick them out, they don’t like conservatives stop deluding yourself, and fight on the real battlefield where your opponents are actually formidable instead of the imaginary one.

      CommoChief in reply to Danny. | February 3, 2022 at 2:28 pm

      Danny,

      So you are personally touching for these young law students? Every single one of them is going to be totes ok when a SR associate or Partner blows up their research or draft brief or filing while using harsh and abusive language?

      The behavior on display by these students is the emotional level of toddlers. They don’t use reason or logic they simply emote, stomp their feet, cry and scream and make threats when the world doesn’t simply hand them what they want.

      Why the Bush reference though, I don’t get it.

    artichoke in reply to CommoChief. | February 6, 2022 at 7:51 pm

    That job pays 150K per year. I hear medical residency pays well too. They are actually winning and will get a lot of stuff and advantages from this.

    Denying the truth is no way to win a war.

No demands for free Netflix subscriptions and big, comfy, oversized pillows to hug while binging?

Reminds me of Cornell in 1969. Cornell capitulated.

Why would you in the end then voluntarily kneecap yourself so that you can’t point out that it’d be a lesser black woman?

Big note

None of them misunderstood the professor, none of them are actually offended, none of them actually need special places or treatment they are weaponizing victimization (something that society CELEBRATES today) as a way to try to purge conservatives from campus.

Georgetown is not an easy place, they know hard work, and no the real world isn’t going to crush reality into them, and they will have more influence after lawschool.

Make fun of them all you want, they got a highly respected conservative legal scholar suspended and may get him fired, They are getting results out of weaponizing feelings, you aren’t getting results out of pretending to believe them about their vulnerability.

They should just go ahead an open a Georgetown School of Race Baiting, and sell degrees. I doubt they ever really learn anything about law.

Those “kids” are fine with hard work, they got into a highly prestigious school and if they couldn’t handle that work the school would kick them out
____________________________________________________________________

that’s one hell of a presumption, particularly regards their admission–what’s sad about the situation is that the students who actually DID qualify for admission and ARE doing the work to earn a degree are forced to do so in an atmosphere where all these disruptive attention-seekers who(though don’t know for certain but am willing to bet)are, in the main, slackers are likely in the bottom of the class–which begs the question, why were they admitted in the first place?–when you reduce the entrance qualifications to the lowest common denominator(and below)or eliminate them entirely, what can any graduate school, business, organization(civilian or otherwise)reasonably expect?

the answer to the majority of this nonsense is simple: restore merit-based qualifications for entrance (grad school) or advancement/promotion(business/military) positions of authority–rather than pander to their “feelings,” reject that nonsense outright and expel them/fire them so that others who DO want to work, learn, advance, have the opportunity to do so in an atmosphere conducive to their efforts–value for value

    What do you base that on? If they’re being coddled over this, who’s to say they aren’t also coddled regarding the work?

    artichoke in reply to texansamurai. | February 6, 2022 at 7:55 pm

    There’s a large gap between what it takes to graduate from Georgetown Law, and the much higher hurdle for a non-racialized applicant to be admitted. Many better students are rejected, but those admitted will still make it to graduation and probably receive extra attention to help them pass the bar.

    This is a powerful institution, and it’s good at hurting us and helping them.

Steven Brizel | February 3, 2022 at 9:22 am

Read the excerpts of Shapiro’s book about SCOTUS and judicial nominations on Amazon. It is a well written history that hooks the reader. The students at Georgetown have zero appreciation of Shapiro’s scholarship and expertise as well as his very active practice at SCOTUS-which is real lawyering and advocacy and instead have acted as judge, jury and executioner under the guise of identity politics with an administration that has no intestinal fortitude to protect either Shapiro and more significantly, the Bill of Rights, Someone commented about Cornell in 1969-that university was the victim of identity politics and IMO has never recovered.. Harry Edwards was an early academic practitioner of identity politics-not a fighter for civil rights.

How dare Georgetown employ anyone with a conservative (minority) opinion,

Leftists are mentally unqualified to be attorneys.

Is it time to reintroduce racism? Georgetown Law students apparently do not know what real racism is and need to experience it to further their education.

Hard to take them seriously when they’re asking for reparations in the form of free meals

e pluribus unum | February 5, 2022 at 2:37 pm

Is there a GoFundMe to buy Kleenex for these poor little waifs?
Are there any college administrators with stones these days? Or were they all hired from daycare staff?

Note to self: Don’t ever hire a lawyer who got his or her JD from this institution.

I can just imagine what would have happened to medical students in my day had they refused to attend gross anatomy or pathology labs because they “hated the sight of dead bodies”. They would have been sailing out of the front doors of the medical school head-first with the dean’s boot print on their backsides.

    artichoke in reply to drsamherman. | February 6, 2022 at 8:00 pm

    Do I remember right that they’re using fewer actual cadavers now in med school? The reason supposedly was that cadavers are harder to come by. But could it also be an accommodation to help the new breed of med student make it to graduation? Then consumers have to try to do quality control on the back end, after they’re doctors.

Expel the little retards. Enough of this crap.

The Dean is trying to play a long gain for survival and for building the law school. Sure he can act conciliatory and pay for snacks during the meeting. However, ultimately, the law school must please all of its funders including those who support the Center for the Constitution.

Standford University faces the same problems with the Hoover Institution. and George Mason University faces the same problem with the Scalia Law School. Individual BLSA leaders arrive, serve for a year, and then move on to try to build their own careers. Most lack any long-term understanding of or attachment to their institutions. In contrast, the supporters of the Center for the Constitution, the Hoover Institution, or the Scalia Law School have a much longer and stronger relationship.

If the tactic is to attack the staff members hired for the Center for the Constitution based upon their beliefs, then it should be equally permissible to attack the Dean of Diversity or the advisor to the BLSA for their beliefs.