Another week of college antics, political correctness and general lunacy in the place we call “Higher Education”...
The lawsuit by Teresa Wagner against the former Dean of the University of Iowa’s College of Law has received a lot of attention, a tortured procedural history (including a prior appeal) and confusing results. In the latest twist, a judge has denied Wagner’s motion for a new trial (full opinion embedded at bottom of post). The lawsuit concerns claims by Wagner that she suffered discrimination based on her conservative political views, resulting in her being denied a promotion (she’s still employed).Paul Mirengoff of Power Line describes the outrageous facts behind the case:
Wagner was already the associate director of the law school’s writing center. Moreover, she had taught legal writing at George Mason University Law School, edited three books, practiced as a trial attorney in Iowa, and written several legal briefs, including one in a U.S. Supreme Court case. In addition, the faculty-appointments committee at the University of Iowa College of Law recommended her appointment as a full-time instructor.
Spotted by The Wife in Ithaca. (No, she did not key the car, but she thought about it.)...
When an administration becomes the law unto itself....
The Palestinian Authority has informed US Secretary of State John Kerry that it will not accept his framework peace proposal as it currently stands, PA officials told The Times of Israel.... Central clauses of the framework deal as presented by Kerry, and rejected by the PA, the Palestinian officials said, are as follows: Borders: The peace agreement is to be based on pre-1967 lines, but will take into consideration changes on the ground in the decades since. Settlements: There will be no massive evacuation of “residents.” Refugees: Palestinian refugees will be able to return to Palestine or remain where they currently live. In addition, it is possible that a limited number of refugees could be allowed into pre-1967 Israel as a humanitarian gesture, and only with Israeli acquiescence. Nowhere is it written that Israel bears responsibility for suffering caused to the refugees. Capital: The Palestinian capital will be in Jerusalem. Security: Israel has the right to defend itself, by itself. The Jordan Valley: The IDF will retain a presence in the Jordan Valley. The length of time the IDF will remain will depend on the abilities of the Palestinian security forces. Border crossings: Israel will continue to control border crossings into Jordan. Definition of the countries: Two states will result, “a national state of the Jewish people and a national state of the Palestinian people.”So what's the problem? Some of these issues probably are surmountable. But one issue probably is not, the recognition of Israel as the Jewish homeland, as further reported by the Times:
“He can say anything he wishes, but immoral? Resistance to his immoral policies can never be immoral,” Mr. Barghouti said of Mr. Netanyahu. “The litmus test is are you boycotting a group of people based on their identity, or are you boycotting something — an act, a company, a business — that you disagree with. “We have three reasons,” Mr. Barghouti said, citing the movement’s goals of ending the occupation; ensuring equality for Palestinian citizens of Israel; and promoting the right of return for Palestinian refugees. “End the three reasons and we won’t boycott.”Barghouti, who got a degree from Tel Aviv University is a pretty good example of equality of Israel's minorities. That degree also makes Barghouti a hypocrites as his boycott would affect Tel Aviv University too. Rudoren ignores these inconsistencies. She also remains silent about Barghouti's demand for the right of return. Everyone knows that the point of that "right" is the destruction of Israel. In fact, Barghouti's claim confirms that the the goal of the BDS movement is an assault on Israel's right to exist is correct. Rudoren doesn't appear to grasp this. Oddly, it is columnist Roger Cohen who got things right about BDS. In The B.D.S. Threat, Cohen writes:
Your Fall fashion: revolution, Occupy, uniforms?...
who like Obama using executive orders to go around Congress? "The Enablers"...
Texas state Sen. Wendy Davis made her name and kick-started her campaign for governor by filibustering an anti-abortion omnibus bill, standing and talking for 11 hours straight in support of abortion rights. So it comes as a surprise — and frankly, a betrayal — to learn that Davis told the Dallas Morning News on Tuesday that she could support a ban on abortions after 20 weeks, if it gave "enough deference between a woman and her doctor" to make the decision to abort after that point for medical reasons.... You may have bought her sneakers, but when it comes down to it, Wendy Davis is a politician.Irin Carmon at MSNBC writes, Wendy Davis falls into abortion question trap:
This week, Texas gubernatorial candidate Wendy Davis delighted her detractors and confounded her pro-choice supporters when she appeared to support the very same 20-week ban she spent 11 hours filibustering..... It’s far too late for Davis to shy away from abortion rights, including the more politically uncomfortable parts, after confronting them head-on in her filibuster. Regardless of what she was trying to say, a political campaign isn’t a great place for complex or nuanced moral conversations. On the campaign trail, Davis would likely be better off if she stuck to the broader point she made in her filibuster: “The alleged reason for the bill is to enhance patient safety. But what [the provisions] really do is create provisions that treat women as though they are not capable of making their own medical decisions.”Tata Culp-Ressler at Think Progress (yes, that Think Progress) wrote, Why Wendy Davis’ Position On 20-Week Abortion Bans Doesn’t Make Any Sense:
("Loud music" murder trial "Allen" charge.)[/caption]
UPDATE (2-15): 9:50AM Jury questions:
(1) Is the defense of self-defense separate for each person in each count? A: "Yes."
(2) Are we determining if deadly force is justified against each person in each count? A: "Yes."
(3) Or if we determine deadly force is justified against one person, is it justified against others? A: "No. Self defense and justifiable use of deadly force applies separately to each count."
UPDATE (2-15): 9:00AM Court came briefly into session. Jury was starting deliberations only now, or within a few minutes. Court in recess until they hear something from the jury. Keep eyes here for breaking news.
UPDATE (2-15): 8:38AM Can hear audio techs in court room 406, "Test 1, 2." No video yet.
UPDATE (2-15): 8:30AM Judge Healey is expected to pro forma bring the court into session at 9:00AM, but it was anticipated that the jury would already be in deliberations by that time. We're here covering the court live, all day.
UPDATE (2-14): 6:50PM Jury requests to be dismissed for the night, saying they have "hit a wall for tonight." Judge allows, no objection. He thanks jury, says he'll let THEM decide what time to start tomorrow. Healey suggests, 9:00, 9:30, and one juror responds, "7:00". The court room breaks into laughter. Healey decides jury can arrive when they wish, he'll be there but rest of court need not, at 9:00AM he'll call court into session and announce what time the jury actually started, just so everyone knows. That's it for tonight, folks.
UPDATE (2-14): 6:40PM Several of Dunn's jail house phone recordings--the cause of so much pre-trial litigation over "open records" disputes with the media--have just been released. These include:
12/3/12: Dunn's call with father about legal options
12/5/12: Dunn's calls with fiancee & his parents
12/26-27/12: Michael Dunn calls to Rhonda Rouer
UPDATE (2-14): 5:00PM Two questions from the jury. First question involves getting a 30 minute break, Healey of course says yes. Second question more substantive: Is it permissible for them to agree on several of the charges, but not on other of the charges. Answer is also yes. Verdicts would be rendered on the ones where unanimous agreement, the others would be hung, and State could re-prosecute on any hung charges at their discretion. (As a reminder, there are five indicted charges--Murder 1, three counts of attempted Murder 1, and hurling missiles. Also the jury is free to consider all lesser included charges.) UPDATE (2-14) 9:00AM Court in session. Discussion in court about simply sending jury straight into deliberations, no formal morning greeting in court. Healey: "This is a working group." Also announced that people will no longer be able to sit in the court room during recess while jury deliberations going on. People have said it might be possible for people in court room to hear talking from jury deliberations, and vice versa. So 5 minutes before reconvene will allow people back into court room. Healey: "Happy Valentines Day to everybody, we'll see you all when we get some word from the jury." Court recessed. UPDATE (2-14): 8:00AM The jury is scheduled to return to deliberations at 9:00AM. We'll be covering the events in the court room all day, real-time, right here at this post on Legal Insurrection. UPDATE (2-13): 6:20PM That's it for tonight, no jury decision yet, we start again at 9:00AM US EST tomorrow. Legal Insurrection's live-coverage will be AT THIS PAGE, so bookmark to come back. UPDATE (2-13): 4:30 Court back in session. Jury asking when letter exhibit #201 written? One of Dunn's jail house letters. Court looks through transcript, identifies as June 2013. This is the "Black Friday" letter, though obviously not written that date. Jury now retiring back to jury room. Healey tells all four alternates they'll be held overnight tonight, but tomorrow can be sequestered in hotel room rather than in court house, more comfortable for them. Update (2-13): 2:25PM Jury reports that one set of jury instructions is missing pages 32-41. (Holy cow, that's a lot of instructions.) Weighing the evidence, defendant's statements, rules for deliberations, cautionary instructions, verdict, submitting case to the jury, not substantive discussions. We didn't change any of these from the model instructions. Just sending back the missing pages. No objections from State or defense. Jurors also requested a dry easel or large paper, which will be sent back to them. Back in recess. UPDATE (2-13): 1:45PMJury asks if they can see "Bendie," the dummy with the trajectory dowels. Normally such demonstrative evidence would not go back to jury. Healey suggests he'll allow if the defense has no objection. Strolla doesn't initially object, but then turns out that the dowels in Bendie were moved around since last seen in court, no longer representative, so objects. Bendie won't go back. Healey writes out explanatory note for bailiff to give to jurors. Calls jurors into court room, reads them the note, "can't send dummy back because it was demonstrative exhibit for demonstrative purposes, not entered into evidence." Sends them back to continue their deliberations. UPDATE (2-13): 1:20PM Jury asks if they can be provided with the "trajectory-rod dummy." Problem is, dummy is demonstrative evidence only, normally would not go back to jury room. State has no objection. Strolla and Dunn discuss briefly in separate room, return and say they also have no objection. Healey, in abundance of caution, recesses for 15 minutes so case law can be reviewed, ensure they don't inadvertently make a move that could result in reversal. UPDATE (2-13): 11:50AM Defense counsel Cory Strolla speaking to reporters in live feed. UPDATE (2-13): 9:43AM. Healey speaks with the four alternate jurors. They were held over in sequester last night, both from the public and the other jurors. He tells them he's not inclined to keep all them overnight again if there's no verdict again, and is inclined to let one or two of them go home even if no verdict. Seems he'll decide later in the day. UPDATE (2-13): 9:39AM. Healey welcomed the jury back. They were not scheduled to start until 10:00AM, but are present and ready to go, so he is not going to hold them up. Last night they requested the gas station market surveillance video, and this morning they have been provided with that video and instructions on how to play it. Court is now in recess until it receives either another jury instruction or a verdict. (As this update was being typed the juror requested an external monitor on which to view the video.)
Complaints about lack of access to insurance for preexisting conditions may be overstated...
Note: You may reprint this cartoon provided you link back to this source. To see more Legal Insurrection Branco cartoons, click here. Branco’s page is Cartoonist A.F.Branco...
Defense and State conclude their closing arguments, Judge Healey instructs the jury, and sends into deliberations...
Huge British Mammogram study finds no benefit to routine screenings....
