#Law firm administration Florida | Explore Tumblr posts and blogs

mariacallous · 4 months ago

Text

The Biden administration’s new Title IX regulations, which strengthen protections for LGBTQ+ students and change how colleges respond to reports of sexual harassment, take effect today nationwide. Kind of.

So far, federal judges have issued six injunctions temporarily blocking the Education Department from enforcing the new Title IX rule in 26 states and hundreds of colleges in other states in response to lawsuits challenging the protections for LGBTQ+—and especially transgender—students. The first injunction was handed down June 14 and the most recent one issued July 31. The drip, drip, drip of court orders over the last seven weeks is part of what’s become an incredibly contentious fight over Title IX that’s left college officials fearful, frustrated and unsure about what comes next.

For some universities, the solution has been straightforward: They’ve simply shelved all or most of their planned changes until the injunctions on their states or institutions are lifted—assuming they eventually will be. Others are moving forward to implement parts of the regulations that haven’t been contested in court, such as new protections for pregnant and parenting students.

Title IX legal experts expect colleges in the 24 states not currently under an injunction to carry out the 2024 regulations. Those in the states under an injunction will likely stick with the rules put in place by the Trump administration in 2020, particularly if their state leaders—like the governors of Florida and Texas—have directed their public colleges and universities not to comply. But some colleges operating under an injunction will fall into a third group, opting for a mix of the 2024 and 2020 rules.

Colleges that don’t comply could face a civil rights investigation or lose their federal funding, though both threats are off the table while there are injunctions. Still, they could face lawsuits from students who say their Title IX rights are being violated, or from groups who take issue with how they implement the new regulations. So how can a college avoid a suit or a federal investigation? The unsatisfying answer is that it’s unclear.

“Everyone is guessing,” said Jody Shipper, managing director of Grand River Solutions, which advises colleges on how to comply with federal civil rights and campus safety laws. Shipper says some of her colleagues have clients who waited until this week to start making changes to comply because they assumed the regulations would be blocked nationally.

“Schools are wanting to do the right thing,” she said. “It’s hard when we don’t know what that is.”

Shipper said that Title IX regulations provide some security for institutions in terms of knowing what definitions of sex-based discrimination to use and what to do if someone files a complaint.

“Everyone had a collective document to sort of look at; we don’t now,” she said. “If it’s campus-by-campus, state-by-state interpretation, on the one hand, I think it’s scarier for schools … On the other hand, there’s a certain freedom if guidance is gone, in that you can decide … If there’s that much freedom, you have to say what you believe is the right thing to do. That pressure is on the school.”

The Biden administration hasn’t provided guidance about what’s expected of those under an injunction, though its lawyers have requested the Supreme Court narrow the scope of the court orders blocking enforcement of the regulations to only the provisions challenged—and let the others go into effect. The justices have yet to weigh in.

Guidance from the Education Department for institutions under an injunction would be “extraordinarily helpful,” said Leslie Gomez, who leads the institutional response group for the law firm Cozen O’Connor along with Gina Maisto Smith. The department released two pages of “pointers for implementation,” but they were only for colleges fully implementing the new rule.

“It’s extraordinarily disruptive, given the cacophony of issues that higher education is navigating,” Smith said of the regulations. The injunctions have only added to the issues, “causing regulatory whiplash of seismic proportions.”

Gomez’s advice to colleges and universities is to “focus on intake, outreach, care and support” and to listen to the needs of their students and broader campus community.

“Details of policy are less critical than the fact that we’re hearing a report or concern or complaint,” she said. “We’re taking action to eliminate the act, prevent its recurrence and address or remedy the impacts.”

But they can’t say whether that approach—likely the safest��will protect colleges from litigation or regulatory enforcement.

None of this is what folks envisioned when the Biden administration rolled out its much-anticipated overhaul of Title IX in April. Advocates and experts predict a confusing start to the school year as students try to sort out what their rights are amid a patchwork of Title IX rules that vary state by state and campus to campus.

“This is not the way we wanted to start,” said Emma Grasso Levine, senior manager of Title IX policy and programs at Know Your IX, a survivor- and youth-led project of the nonprofit Advocates for Youth. “It’s an all-the-more-confusing nightmare for students and administrations … Everything is up in the air, and that means that students’ rights are up in the air.”

Levine and other advocates are urging colleges to implement the 2024 rule, noting that the court orders only prevent the Education Department from enforcing the regulations rather than preventing institutions from adhering to them. But the “intense political climate” around Title IX right now might make college officials more hesitant to do that, she said.

“We’re pushing schools to do the right thing, but it’s an uphill battle with the political climate,” she said.

‘Stand Down’

Until two weeks ago, Zeva Edmondson, the director of the Office of Equal Opportunity and the Title IX coordinator at the University of Nevada at Reno, had been working to prepare for the Aug. 1 deadline—not only with her team on campus, but with a consortium of Title IX coordinators across the state’s higher education system. Their efforts included updating campus policies, adjusting how investigations of sexual misconduct work and preparing new training about Title IX for campus employees and students.

Most of those were relatively simple tweaks, and she felt the biggest challenge would be getting employees on board with the new requirement that they undergo Title IX training annually, rather than every other year, as the Trump-era rules mandated.

But all that work was put on hold when a federal judge in Kansas blocked the regulations from being enforced on campuses that are home to a chapter of Young America’s Foundation, Female Athletes United or Moms for Liberty—conservative organizations that oppose the regulation’s expanded protections for transgender students in particular. UNR was one of those campuses and one of only four in the state of Nevada to be impacted.

Now, Edmondson said, all policy changes have been put on pause until the injunction is lifted—assuming it will be. “We just have to stand down until they give us the green light,” she said.

For students at institutions affected by a court order, it may be difficult to keep track of what regulations their university is operating under—and whether the harassment they are experiencing is even covered under Title IX, said Tracey Vitchers, executive director of It’s On Us, an advocacy organization dedicated to combating campus sexual violence.

The Biden administration expanded the scope of the types of incidents and actions under a college’s Title IX jurisdiction by lowering the standard for sexual harassment and requiring institutions to address conduct that happens off campus. Currently, the standard for sexual harassment is that the conduct is considered “severe, pervasive, and objectively offensive,” but the Biden administration would lower the standard to “sufficiently severe or pervasive.”

A student might be unsure whether an incident of harassment would even “qualify to be investigated,” she said, thanks to “the standard of ‘and/or’ that we’ve seen go back and forth.”

“The landscape is changing almost daily … and what it’s resulting in is this really harmful patchwork of how schools are applying what they think they’re supposed to do, and the end result of that is going to be students are harmed by this patchwork, and by this confusion, and their rights are going to be violated. They’re going to experience harm, they’re not going to trust Title IX to support them, and that is deeply problematic,” she said.

This is especially relevant at the beginning of the academic year, when most students, especially freshmen, learn what Title IX means for them and how to protect their rights under that law. Those include the ability to access supportive measures such as changing classes or moving dorm rooms for those who experience harassment, which includes sexual assault and stalking, among other types of incidents.

More than half of college sexual assaults occur during the first four months of the academic year in a period known as the red zone. How institutions respond to reports of assault can make the difference between a student continuing on with their education or dropping out, according to advocates.

‘Status Quo Should Remain in Place’

UNR isn’t alone in halting its planned Title IX revisions. Elsewhere, universities in entire states have pressed pause.

At the University of North Dakota, officials were told to “follow the injunction and to not implement, obviously, any policies or procedures that would conflict with that,” said Donna Smith, assistant vice president of equal opportunity and Title IX.

A federal judge on July 26 blocked the department from enforcing the regulations in North Dakota and five other states. The university was also affected by a court ruling issued earlier last month that meant universities in the state didn’t have to comply with the regulations. In an email to Title IX leaders, the system’s chief compliance officer, Christopher Pieske, wrote that “until the lawsuit is complete the status quo should remain in place. The 2020 Title IX regulations are still in effect.” He advised them to consult with their legal counsels about how the injunctions could impact their specific campus policies.

Donna Smith said that a small number of policy adjustments at UND that do not conflict with the 2020 regulations will still move forward, such as expanded protections for pregnant students. The university has had policies to support pregnant students in place since 2022, but in response to the 2024 regulations, it added language encouraging employees to provide resources to any student who tells them they are pregnant.

The Universities of Wisconsin said on social media this week that the system has “suspended permanent and emergency rulemaking regarding Title IX” and that the 2020 regulations remain in effect, even though it released draft policy changes earlier this summer and held public hearings about them. Ten of the system’s 13 universities were included in the conservative groups’ list of institutions under an injunction.

Vitchers said some colleges do not seem to understand the limitations of the court orders and thus are opting to delay all Title IX changes in an effort to mitigate risk, like in Wisconsin. But that can be a dangerous strategy, she said.

“We know that when the motivation is risk mitigation, it’s ultimately student and campus safety that is harmed,” she said.

She advised universities to “overcommunicate” with their students amid the ongoing legal challenges in an effort to keep them abreast of where Title IX stands at their institutions on any given day.

“If an institution is unclear, they need to admit that to their students,” she said. “They need to communicate that the institution is doing what it can to navigate this incredibly complex and seemingly ever-changing landscape around Title IX, and reassure students that as updates become available, that they will communicate them to the student body, and in plain language, [so] they can understand what’s going on and how what is happening is affecting their policies and procedures.”

Still Forging Forward

Not every campus has decided that hitting pause is the best path forward. Some will still implement elements of their planned policy changes, while staying within the injunctions’ relatively wide bounds.

Elon University, a private institution in North Carolina that has been impacted by a court order, will implement a handful of new policies and programs that don’t go against the injunction and aim to make campus a safer place for students, says Megan Karbley, Elon’s Title IX coordinator and director of compliance.

Karbley, who has worked in Title IX for 15 years, joined Elon just months before the new regulations were released. At the time, the university’s Title IX office and other related offices were already beginning to review existing Title IX policies and plan for changes under the new regulations.

“[I was] coming into a new campus knowing that we would have—were supposed to have—new regulations. And I think a lot of coordinators and a lot of offices have been ready for a while, waiting for the regulations to come through,” she said.

Although she said that the injunction has thrown a wrench into those plans, her office has been able to move forward with plans that “we already had in place or [that already had] momentum.” For example, the university plans to introduce restorative justice practices into its Title IX resolution process and will offer more training related to how the campus community can use the Title IX office as a resource.

“I kept saying, ‘We’re going to keep trying to make this better and friendlier and more supportive for the people involved, and we don’t need a regulation to do that’ … Compliance is the floor, not the ceiling,” she said. “We’re not doing more training because the regs tell us to do more training, but because we want our campus to know what the resources are.”

But big changes related to things such as who on a college campus is required to report potential incidents of gender-based discrimination or harassment to the Title IX office will be put on the back burner. The new regulations paint with a broader brush concerning what is considered a report of gender-based discrimination or harassment; under the previous regulations, only formal complaints counted, but now verbal disclosures can, too. They also expand who must report such incidents to almost all university employees. The 2020 regulations gave institutions flexibility in determining which employees would be considered so-called mandatory reporters, though colleges over the years have opted for broad reporting requirements similar to what’s in the final rule.

This was shaping up to be a contentious change, Karbley and other experts told Inside Higher Ed, with faculty members arguing that students who entrust them with information about a sexual assault do not benefit from having that information reported against their will. That’s why she began an information campaign even before the regulations were finalized this past April.

“Part of the goal in really increasing our education and outreach is so that if or when we do get told we do have to train all faculty and staff and they are mandatory reporters … so many people will be engaged with the Title IX office through our outreach efforts that it won’t seem like an extra act, that won’t seem like a burden,” she said.

For the time being, the definition of a mandated reporter at Elon will not change, though employees will be tasked with connecting students with certain resources if they disclose harassment or discrimination under the title of “responsible employee.”

Karbley said that the back-and-forth over who is a mandated reporter can be difficult for students who are unsure whom they can go to for what supports.

“Part of our responsibility, I think, is to try to stabilize for the community as much as possible, and, of course, since the [court order] dropped, I have felt like my ability to do that for my campus has been [challenged],” she said. “But I still think there are ways … we can change that as infrequently as possible and decide what’s best for our campuses.”

Some Hiccups, Even Without Court Orders

Even at institutions where there is no court order blocking the regulations, adapting policies hasn’t exactly been easy.

Angela Catena, Title IX coordinator at the University of New Mexico, said it will be challenging for the 2020 and 2024 regulations to coexist; the Trump administration’s regulations will be applied for any incidents that occurred before Aug. 1, even if they are reported after the effective date of the new regulations.

“How do we have two of the same policies that are always going to be live? And so our policy office is scratching their head, and I’m like, I don’t know, I’m sorry. I don’t know what to tell you,” she said. Once the 2024 regulations have been in effect long enough, she added, UNM will likely bring in consultants to handle any cases that occurred while the old regulations were in effect.

Despite this hiccup, Catena’s office has made a number of changes in response to the new regulations. She said that while the new rule has broadened the range of incidents that violate Title IX, it gives colleges more freedom to respond in a way that best fits particular situations.

Previously, she said, different university policies covered different kinds of Title IX cases, causing confusion over which policy should be used when and slowing the overall process. Now UNM’s Title IX office has developed a stand-alone sex discrimination policy that will govern all Title IX cases, which Catena anticipates will make the process significantly smoother.

To improve flexibility and comfort for victims, the university will hire for a new intake coordinator role, who will be in charge of figuring out if complainants would be best served by the Title IX office or another resource on campus. This is a departure from the process under the Trump regulations, Catena said, when the office was required to immediately jump into an investigation upon receiving a complaint.

Of little impact has been the new rule that sparked so many of the lawsuits: the inclusion of gender identity as a protected category under Title IX. Those students were already protected at UNM, she said.

“UNM and New Mexico have always protected our queer community and will continue to do so. We have state laws and the institution will always, even if federally it is pulled back, we will have institutional policies that will continue to protect” the LGBTQ+ community, she said.

According to the Movement Advancement Project, a think tank that tracks pro- and anti-LGBTQ legislation, 20 states and the District of Columbia prohibit discrimination in schools based on gender identity or sexual orientation.

Catena said that unless her state is hit by an injunction, she anticipates the rollout of the new policies will be “smooth sailing” over the coming academic year. But she is worried about how the battle over Title IX will play out across the country—even in future regulatory eras.

“The people that we’re supposed to be serving keep getting lost in the fight. I’m grateful I have a clear path forward that hasn’t changed in terms of who or what we protect,” she said, “but I’m also really sad that that path might also change again when the regs change again.”

10 notes · View notes

eretzyisrael · 11 months ago

Text

by Hannah Grossman

Following these events, protests broke out on college campuses – and pro-Palestinian demonstrations frightened Jewish students for, in many cases, sympathizing with Hamas' crimes and justifying them.

"The barbarity and pure evil of the unspeakable acts committed by these terrorists against civilians - men, women, and children - shocked the world. But what was just as shocking was what we saw next: college students and faculty cheering these attacks," Goldstein said.

At Cornell University, students told Fox News Digital they felt unsafe when a professor, Russell Rickford, said he was "exhilarated" after the Hamas terrorist attack. Students at Cornell, and around the country, also faced hostile rhetoric and chants from their peers such as calls for the elimination of Israel "From the river to the sea" and for "Intifada" – the Arabic word for "uprising" that also refers to violent Palestinian resistance efforts.

‘PURE HATE’: JEWISH STUDENTS DISCUSS LIFE IN WAKE OF ISRAEL WAR

Russell Rickford is a history professor at Cornell University. (FOX News Digital | Getty)

The hostilities from the anti-Israel crowd – and their disruptions – led Brandeis University, Rutgers, Columbia University and George Washington University to suspend its Students for Justice in Palestine chapters. The SJP's national chapter called the Hamas terrorist attack a "historic win" for Palestinian resistance.

SJP was contacted for comment.

Brandeis cited concerns about whether the group's rhetoric was supportive of Hamas. It reminded students that such behavior "will be considered to be in violation of the University’s student code of conduct."

In the most extreme case, GWU students projected Palestinian phrases on a school building stating, "Glory to our martyrs."

The State of Florida, under the DeSantis administration, directed its colleges to terminate student chapters that support "Hamas terrorism." The directive warned that it was a "felony under Florida law to knowingly provide material support … to a designated foreign terrorist organization."

"Students for Justice in Palestine and its related groups have not only repeatedly cheered antisemitic terrorism, they have advocated importing it to America," said Liora Rez from StopAntisemitism, referring to chants for "Intifada."

Individuals have spoken out in favor or against of Brandeis University's decision to disband the Students for Justice in Palestine. (Getty Images)

Roz Rothstein of the pro-Israel group StandWithUs told Fox News she believed SJP chapters have feigned concern for social justice in order to gain supporters, and then laid the groundwork for "extreme campus antisemitism."

Jewish students had, for years, complained about campus antisemitism at universities. But it came to a boiling point when the nation heard the leaders of the most elite universities in the country voluntarily showed up to a congressional hearing and then refused to state that calls for genocide against Jews violated its policy. Donors pulled their money, firms threatened to strip recruitments, and now some students are questioning their interests in elite institutions such as Harvard.

"For over two decades, we’ve raised concerns about this issue… and it appears that now, finally, our warnings are resonating with the wider public," Cohen said.

#campus antisemitism #hamas #gaza #academic antisemitism #students for justice in palestine #harvard #university of pennsylvania

24 notes · View notes

foreverlogical · 7 months ago

Text

On May 1, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis announced that he had signed into law a bill that prohibits the production or sale of lab-grown meat in the state. DeSantis noted that Florida was the first state to enact such a ban, declaring, "Our administration will continue to focus on investing in our local farmers and ranchers, and we will save our beef."

Liberal economist Paul Krugman is vehemently critical of DeSantis' move in his May 7 column for the New York Times. The ban, Krugman argues, is not only against freedom of choice — it also underscores the modern Republican Party's ability to turn anything and everything into a "culture-war" battle.

"It's possible to grow meat in a lab — to cultivate animal cells without an animal and turn them into something people can eat," Krugman explains. "However, that process is difficult and expensive. And at the moment, lab-grown meat isn't commercially available and probably won't be for a long time, if ever."

But DeSantis, Krugman adds, is "cracking down" on an "industry that doesn't even exist yet."

"The new Florida law is a perfect illustration of how crony capitalism, culture war, conspiracy theorizing and rejection of science have been merged — ground together, you might say — in a way that largely defines American conservatism today," Krugman observes. "First, it puts the lie to any claim that the right is the side standing firm for limited government; government doesn't get much more intrusive than having politicians tell you what you can and can't eat."

The fact that "meat consumption, like almost everything else, has been caught up in the culture wars," Krugman laments, shows how intellectually bankrupt and devoid of substance the modern GOP has become in the age of Donald Trump.

"For a lot of them, politics is a form of live-action role play. It's not even about 'owning' those they term the elites; it's about perpetually jousting with a fantasy version of what elites supposedly want."

7 notes · View notes

justinspoliticalcorner · 8 months ago

Text

Carter Sherman and Lauren Gambino at The Guardian:

Kamala Harris’s Friday visit to Arizona was planned before the state’s top court upheld a 160-year-old law that bans almost all abortions. But the news galvanized the vice-president’s message, one that has already yielded stunning victories for liberals since Roe v Wade fell nearly two years ago. That message is simple: abortion bans happen when Republicans are in charge.

“Women here live under one of the most extreme abortion bans in our nation. … The overturning of Roe was without any question a seismic event, and this ban here in Arizona is one of the biggest aftershocks yet,” Harris said at the Tucson event. “Overturning Roe was just the opening act of a larger strategy to take women’s rights and freedoms … We all must understand who is to blame. Former president Donald Trump did this.”

The ruling from the Arizona supreme court arrived on Tuesday, just days after a Florida supreme court ruling cleared the way for a six-week abortion ban, a decision that will cut off access to the procedure before many women even know they are pregnant. These back-to-back rulings roiled the United States, raising the already high stakes of the 2024 elections to towering new heights. Activists in both states are now at work on ballot measures that would ask voters to enshrine abortion rights in their states’ constitutions in November.

Democrats are hopeful these efforts – and the potential threat of more bans under a Trump administration – will mobilize voters in their favor, because abortion rights are popular among Americans, and Republicans have spent years pushing restrictions. Democrats have made abortion rights a central issue of their campaigns in Arizona, which was already expected to be a major battleground, and Florida, a longtime election bellwether that has swung further to the right in recent years. For Joe Biden, who is struggling to generate enthusiasm among voters, turning 2024 into a referendum on abortion may be his best shot at defeating Donald Trump. But it remains an open question whether the backlash to Roe’s overturning will continue to drive voters in a presidential election year, when they may be more swayed by concern over the economy and immigration.

“In public polls that might just ask: ‘What’s your most important issue?’ You’re going to see abortion in the middle, maybe even towards the bottom,” said Tresa Undem, a co-founder of the polling firm PerryUndem who has studied public opinion on abortion for two decades. “But when you talk to core groups that Democrats need to turn out, it’s front and center.” A recent Wall Street Journal poll found that Trump held double-digit leads when swing state voters were asked who would best handle the economy, inflation and immigration, but they trusted Biden more on abortion. A Fox News poll in March found that most voters in Arizona believe Biden will do a better job handling the issue of abortion, but it was less of a priority than the economy, election integrity and foreign policy.

For Biden, abortion is “the best issue for him right now”, Undem said. “All of the data I’ve seen on this upcoming election, young people are not nearly as motivated to vote as they were in 2020. And so in places like Arizona, the total ban – and I don’t make predictions ever – I do think it is going to turn out young people, especially young women.” The Biden campaign has released two abortion-focused ads this week, including one that features a Texas woman who was denied an abortion after her water broke too early in pregnancy. (She ended up in the ICU.) Indivisible, a national grassroots organization with a local presence in states across the country, said volunteer sign-ups to knock on doors in Arizona spiked 50% following the state supreme court’s ruling. Its members in Arizona are helping to organize rallies in support of reproductive rights as well as events to collect signatures for the ballot measure.

When Roe fell, abortion rights’ grip on voters was far from guaranteed. Mitch McConnell, Senate Republicans’ longtime leader and an architect of the conservative supreme court majority that overturned Roe, brushed off outrage over its demise as “a wash” in federal elections. Although most Americans support some degree of access to the procedure, anti-abortion voters were more likely to say the issue was important to their vote than pro-abortion rights voters. The fall of Roe changed that. Anger over Roe was credited with halting Republicans’ much-promised “red wave” in the 2022 midterm elections, while pro-abortion rights ballot measures triumphed, even in crimson states such as Kansas and Kentucky. Last year, when Virginia Republicans tried retake control of the state legislature by championing a “compromise” 15 week-ban, they failed. Democrats now control both chambers in the state.

“When Republicans offer compromises, I think a lot of voters are inclined not to see those as what the Republican party really wants long-term but what the Republican party thinks is necessary to settle for in the short term,” said Mary Ziegler, a University of California at Davis School of Law professor who studies the legal history of reproduction. “They know that Republicans are aligned with the pro-life movement and the pro-life movement wants fetal personhood and a ban at fertilization.”

With the respective state supreme courts in Arizona and Florida upholding cruel abortion bans, Democrats are set to pounce on backlash against abortion bans to guide them to victory in Arizona, Florida, and the whole nation.

#Abortion Bans #Abortion #Democrats #Democratic Party #2024 Elections #Arizona #Florida #2024 Presidential Election #2024 Election Polls

9 notes · View notes

evermoredeluxe · 10 months ago

Text

https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2024/02/06/taylor-swift-jet-tracking-legal-threat/

By Drew Harwell

Taylor Swift’s attorneys have threatened legal action against a Florida college student who runs social media accounts tracking the flights of her and other celebrities’ private jets.

Jack Sweeney, a junior at the University of Central Florida, has for years run accounts that log the takeoffs and landings of planes and helicopters owned by hundreds of billionaires, politicians, Russian oligarchs and other public figures, along with estimates of their planet-warming emissions. The accounts use publicly available data from the Federal Aviation Administration and volunteer hobbyists who can track the aircraft via the signals they broadcast.

Sweeney’s accounts fueled a free-speech debate in late 2022 when X, formerly Twitter, banned Sweeney for sharing what the platform’s owner, Elon Musk, said were his “assassination coordinates.” The accounts don’t say who travels on the aircraft or where they go once the planes land.

In December, Swift’s attorney at the Washington law firm Venable wrote Sweeney a cease-and-desist letter saying Swift would “have no choice but to pursue any and all legal remedies” if he did not stop his “stalking and harassing behavior.”

Sweeney’s accounts had caused Swift and her family “direct and irreparable harm, as well as emotional and physical distress,” and had heightened her “constant state of fear for her personal safety,” the lawyer, Katie Wright Morrone, wrote, according to a copy of the letter sent to the home of Sweeney’s parents. Sweeney shared the letter with The Washington Post.

“While this may be a game to you, or an avenue that you hope will earn you wealth or fame, it is a life-or-death matter for our Client,” Morrone wrote. She added that there is “no legitimate interest in or public need for this information, other than to stalk, harass, and exert dominion and control.”

The pop star has routinely faced stalkers showing up outside her homes, Morrone wrote, and one man now faces stalking and harassment charges after being arrested last month outside her townhouse in Manhattan.

Asked whether Swift’s representatives knew of any evidence that stalkers had used the jet-tracking accounts, Tree Paine, a spokeswoman for Swift, said, “We cannot comment on any ongoing police investigation but can confirm the timing of stalkers suggests a connection. His posts tell you exactly when and where she would be.”

Sweeney, 21, told The Post he saw the letter as an attempt to scare him away from sharing public data. The accounts offer only an incomplete sketch of which cities Swift might currently be in, similar to the public schedules for her concerts or any NFL games she might attend, he said. And the letters, he added, were sent to him at a time when she faced criticism over her flights’ environmental impact.

“This information is already out there,” he said. “Her team thinks they can control the world.”

Private-jet flights are routinely criticized for their “disproportionately high” impact on climate change, and Sweeney’s accounts have often been used to name and shame their most famous passengers. In 2022, the accounts were cited in an analysis that estimated Swift was the “biggest celebrity [carbon dioxide] polluter” of the year.

Her publicist told The Post then that the analysis was flawed because her jet was often loaned out to other people. Paine told The Post on Monday that Swift bought more than double the “carbon credits” needed to offset her travel before her recent tour kicked off.

Around the time of the December letter, Facebook and Instagram disabled the accounts Sweeney had created to track Swift’s air travel, saying they broke the platforms’ privacy rules, he said. He began posting those updates onto accounts on Facebook and Instagram that he uses to log the travel of planes used by a range of stars, called Celeb Jets. Then, last month, Morrone sent a second letter saying his posts about Swift’s aircraft constituted “harassing conduct.”

The letters included the names of three other Venable attorneys experienced in litigation, including one who says on LinkedIn that she is the founding member of the firm’s “Digital Crisis Planning & Response client solution” and helps “high-profile individuals” manage crises of varying magnitude, such as “celebrity disgrace events.”

Morrone did not respond to requests for comment. Meta, which owns Facebook and Instagram, also did not respond.

Planes in the sky regularly broadcast their locations via transponders so air traffic controllers and other pilots can see where they’re going. Anyone on the ground can pick up those signals using a cheap device, known as an ADS-B receiver, that is widely sold online.

The FAA allows plane owners to request their flights be hidden in the federal data that undergirds popular consumer flight-tracking websites, such as FlightAware. Swift’s jet appears to be blocked through such a request.

But many aviation hobbyists feed their raw data into independent websites, such as ADS-B Exchange, that those FAA requests do not cover. Criminal investigators, journalists and researchers have used those sites to look up historical flight paths or see who’s flying overhead.

Swift, Time magazine’s 2023 “person of the year,” made history Sunday as the only musician to win four best-album Grammy Awards, and her every movement is closely watched by paparazzi and superfans. Her “Eras Tour” last year was credited with boosting the local economies of every city she stopped in; one study cited by The Post estimated that “Swifties” spent about $93 million per show.

Her travel plans have drawn increased attention in recent weeks as she’s flown to watch her boyfriend, Travis Kelce, play for the Kansas City Chiefs, including from conservatives who have seized on the trips to criticize her.

They have also become a key point of interest for her fans, especially because her upcoming concert in Tokyo is just hours before Kelce’s scheduled Super Bowl appearance on Sunday in Las Vegas. Even Japan’s embassy in Washington recognized the public’s interest, posting on X last week, “Despite the 12-hour flight and 17-hour time difference, the Embassy can confidently Speak Now to say that … she should comfortably arrive” on time.

Sweeney’s accounts have in recent months tracked two jets that were owned by Nashville-based companies and registered to be operated by a Swift company called Firefly Entertainment, according to FAA documents. They do not track who travels on the planes or any other chartered flights.

Swift’s spokeswoman told The Post that “there is only one plane.” One of the planes previously tracked by Sweeney’s accounts, a Dassault Falcon 900, was marked in FAA records last week as being transferred to a real estate company. Each jet sells for about $25 million, according to brokerage estimates cited last month by The Post.

After X banned him and his accounts in December 2022, Sweeney opened new Facebook and Instagram accounts for Swift, former president Donald Trump, Amazon founder Jeff Bezos, reality star Kim Kardashian and Meta chief Mark Zuckerberg, among others. All of those accounts except for Swift’s remain online — including the accounts for Zuckerberg, who runs both sites. (Bezos owns The Washington Post.)

Sweeney continues to post Swift jet updates to other platforms, including Bluesky, Mastodon and Telegram. To abide by X’s rule against real-time location tracking, he also created accounts that post Musk and Swift’s flight updates with a 24-hour delay.

The December letter from Swift’s attorney states that Sweeney’s actions are “in violation of several state laws” but does not specify them. The letter does, however, cite nine anonymous Instagram comments saying the account is “scary,” “pathetic,” “weird,” invasive” and “dangerous” “stalker behavior.”

The letter says Sweeney is “notorious for disregarding the personal safety of others in exchange for public attention and/or requests for financial gain” and cites a message he sent to Musk in 2021, during which he countered Musk’s $5,000 offer to delete the Musk-jet account with a suggestion of $50,000, as first reported by the now-defunct tech blog Protocol. Sweeney said no money was ever exchanged.

After receiving the letters, Sweeney said he asked for help from the Electronic Frontier Foundation, a digital rights group, which sent his request to a list of attorneys. James Slater, a Florida lawyer who specializes in First Amendment and internet speech issues, responded on Sweeney’s behalf to the Venable letter.

Slater wrote that Morrone had not identified any legal claim, that the jet information posed “no threat” to Swift’s safety, and that Sweeney’s account had “engaged in protected speech that does not violate any of Ms. Swift’s legal rights,” according to a copy reviewed by The Post. Slater said he has yet to receive a response.

In an interview, Slater said he thought the Swift attorney’s letters were “hyperbolic and unfounded” and sent in hopes that Sweeney would “just delete everything and do what they said.”

“This isn’t about putting a GPS tracker on someone and invading their privacy. It’s using public information to track the jet of a public figure,” he said. “This is their means to try to quash a PR issue and bully my client to have the bad coverage die down.”

#just to have it on here #jet #jack sweeney #arshia talks

9 notes · View notes

ehrhardtlawpllc · 2 months ago

Text

Law firm administration Florida

At Ehrhardt Law PLLC, we specialize in law firm administration Florida. Whether it's case management, compliance, or streamlining daily operations, our team helps your practice run smoothly and efficiently. Leave the administrative tasks to us so you can focus on your clients. Contact us today to optimize your law firm's administration.

#Law firm administration Florida #ehrhardtlawfirm

0 notes

eestateandtrust · 9 months ago

Text

Was your Estate Plan Prepared in Another State?

Just moved to Florida recently with your family? As a non-Florida resident, is your estate plan made out of the state? If yes, then you might need to update it. Learn more about why and how you can update your estate plan as a Florida resident so that your revised estate plan complies with Florida state laws.

#estate planning #elder law #trust administration #probate #florida probate #estate management #financial planning #money management #future planning #law firm #lawyer

1 note · View note

religion-is-a-mental-illness · 1 year ago

Text

By: Rikki Schlott

Published: Sep 6, 2023

Harvard University is officially 2023’s worst school for free speech.

The Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE) released its annual college free speech rankings on Wednesday, which dubbed the state of free speech at the Ivy League school “abysmal.”

“I’m not totally surprised,” Sean Stevens, director of polling and analytics at FIRE, told The Post. “We’ve done these rankings for years now, and Harvard is consistently near the bottom.”

Despite being the most acclaimed academic institution in the country, Harvard received a 0.00-point free speech ranking on a 100-point scale — a full 11 points behind the next-worst school.

FIRE says the dismal score was “generous,” considering Harvard’s actual score was a -10.69, according to its

Harvard’s score was dragged down by the fact that nine professors and researchers there faced calls to be punished or fired based on what they had said or written — and seven of the nine were actually professionally disciplined.

“I thought it would be pretty much impossible for a school to fall below zero, but they’ve had so many scholar sanctions,” Stevens said.

The score is calculated based on factors including how strong the school’s policies in favor of free speech are and how many professors, students and campus speakers have been targeted by authorities for their speech.

Bonuses are applied if the school’s administrators stand up for the rights of those whose free speech was threatened.

The rankings also take into account student sentiment about free speech based on polling FIRE conducted in partnership with research firm College Pulse.

Harvard’s lowest rank comes despite the fact that more than 100 of its professors banded together earlier this year to form a Council on Academic Freedom to defend open inquiry on campus.

“We are in a crisis time right now,” Janet Halley, a Harvard Law School professor and member of the council, told The Post in April. “Many, many people are being threatened with — and actually put through — disciplinary processes for their exercise of free speech and academic freedom.”

Second-worst on the list was the University of Pennsylvania in Philadelphia, followed by the University of South Carolina in Columbia, Georgetown University in DC, and Fordham University in the Bronx and Manhattan.

Although Columbia University took the prize of worst school for free speech last year, it ranked 214th out of 248 this time around.

The number one school for free speech was Michigan Technological University in Houghton, Michigan. The school earned 78.01 out of 100 possible points.

“I’m not necessarily surprised that a technological school has a better speech climate, primarily for the reason that they don’t really talk as much about controversial topics,” Stevens said. “They’re there to make things work as engineers.”

Auburn University, the University of New Hampshire, Oregon State University and Florida State University rounded out the top five.

FIRE’s survey of 55,000 current students from 254 universities also yielded some staggering results.

Fifty-six percent of students worry about getting canceled for something they said, and 27% said it’s acceptable to use violence to stop campus speech in some circumstances.

As FIRE continues to be inundated with allegations of free speech violations, Stevens says the erosion of campus discourse should concern everyone.

“I’d say the state of free speech on campus is stagnant at best, and possibly a little worse than last year.”

#FIRE #Rikki Schlott #Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression #Harvard University #academic integrity #academic freedom #freedom of speech #free speech #freedom of expression #viewpoint diversity #echo chamber #approved message #ideological conformity #censorship #self censorship #free speech on campus #religion is a mental illness

11 notes · View notes

barnabyseyelashes · 10 months ago

Text

Taylor Swift threatens legal action against student who tracks her jet

source: http://archive.today/GXNqC

Taylor Swift’s attorneys have threatened legal action against a Florida college student who runs social media accounts tracking the flights of her and other celebrities’ private jets.

alright muskette calm down over there

#do you think people have… missiles?#how the fuck is using public info on PLANE MOVEMENTS “stalking” esp when you “loan it out all the time” like lmfao.#🧿🧿🧿 i know they will come for me. oh well. so be it

3 notes · View notes

mariacallous · 3 days ago

Text

President-elect Donald Trump is expected to select a new chair of the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) in the coming days. His team is asking the crypto industry to weigh in on potential picks, according to sources who claim to be close to proceedings.

Trump’s shortlist is filled with former government officials, crypto executives, and lawyers who support the crypto industry: Paul Atkins, former SEC commissioner, and Brian Brooks, former acting US comptroller of the currency, are the top two contenders, sources familiar tell WIRED, but the vetting process is ongoing.

Other candidates include SEC commissioner Mark Uyeda, former SEC general counsel Robert Stebbins, and Brad Bondi, the global cochair of investigations and white collar defense at the law firm Paul Hastings, WIRED understands. The chief legal officer for Robinhood, Dan Gallagher, was also up for the role but bowed out of the race over the weekend.

Uyeda declined to comment. Neither the Trump transition team, Atkins, Brooks, Stebbins, nor Bondi responded to a request for comment.

To help craft policy and implement his campaign pledges, Trump is also expected to appoint a crypto czar. The czar would lead a board of advisers comprising a colorful cast of crypto characters, sources tell WIRED. A variety of industry leaders are rumored to be in line for a position on the panel, from companies like Coinbase, Gemini, and Kraken, as well as pro-crypto venture capital firms and crypto mining outfits.

Jonathan Jachym, global head of policy and government relations at Kraken, declined to comment on the competition for places on the advisory council, but says the company welcomes the opportunity to steer crypto policy under the Trump administration. “We take our leadership role in the industry very seriously, and that includes informing and driving regulatory clarity and policy outcomes,” he says. Gemini declined to comment. Coinbase did not respond immediately to a request for comment.

Under Gary Gensler, the sitting SEC chair, the crypto industry has faced what many in its ranks allege to be an unjust and targeted barrage of litigation. Among the crypto faithful, Gensler has become something of a cartoon villain. Tyler Winklevoss, cofounder of crypto exchange Gemini, recently went as far as to describe him as “evil.”

In July, at a bitcoin conference in Nashville, Tennessee, Trump pledged to fire Gensler if reelected, drawing perhaps the most raucous applause of the night. “I will appoint an SEC chair who will build the future, not block the future,” Trump said.

Last week, Gensler announced that he would resign from his office on January 20, the day of Trump’s inauguration. Representatives of the industry in which Gensler has become so maligned are now helping to pick out his successor, sources tell WIRED.

The promise of an SEC overhaul was one of many made to the crypto industry by Trump on the campaign trail. At the Nashville conference, he pledged to cement the US as the foremost bitcoin mining powerhouse, create a national “bitcoin stockpile,” and establish a framework for stablecoin businesses, singing from the crypto hymn sheet.

In June, Trump hosted executives from the crypto mining industry at Mar-a-Lago, his resort in Florida. “We had a very long, in-depth discussion with him—and he was very interested. He was very engaged and asked great questions,” says Brian Morgenstern, head of public policy at bitcoin mining company Riot Platforms and a former official in the first Trump administration, who was in attendance.

Trump has even begun to dabble in crypto himself. Over the summer, his campaign began accepting crypto donations, and his sons launched their own crypto platform, World Liberty Financial, which he helped to promote. Last Thursday, The New York Times reported that Trump’s social media company, Truth Social, filed a trademark application for what was described as a crypto payment service called TruthFi.

Figures allied with the crypto industry have already been appointed to Trump’s cabinet. His pick for Secretary of Commerce, Howard Lutnick, leads the financial services company Cantor Fitzgerald, which manages assets for Tether, operator of the world’s largest stablecoin. Likewise, vice president-elect JD Vance, nominee for Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services Robert F. Kennedy Jr., and coleader of the new Department of Government Efficiency Vivek Ramaswamy have all expressed pro-crypto views.

“Based on what I've heard in private conversations, my perspective has been that the incoming administration is taking their pro-bitcoin and crypto campaign promises very seriously and intend to do a robust assessment of options to optimize [appointments to regulatory positions] as best they can,” says Christopher Calicott, managing director at bitcoin-focused VC firm Trammell Venture Partners.

The price of bitcoin has risen to record heights, just shy of $100,000 per coin, since Trump won reelection earlier this month.

“The entire industry is going to have much brighter prospects on a number of different fronts,” says Morgenstern. “We don’t have any reason to doubt President Trump.”

3 notes · View notes

dreaminginthedeepsouth · 2 years ago

Photo

David Horsey

* * * *

Top Democrats lashed out at a “new wave” of climate denialism in the Republican party at a corporate conference this week, warning “Maga ideology” was becoming a major risk to US industry and business. John Podesta, President Biden’s senior clean energy adviser, cautioned Wall Street investors that Republican attacks on “woke capitalism” were “irresponsible” and against free market principles.

“Some people in Washington are taking this moment to try to hamper fiduciary responsibilities and investment decisions with Maga ideology,” said Podesta, adding that investing in clean energy was not controversial but “common sense”.“You can’t de-risk your portfolio if you can’t factor material climate hazard into your investment decisions,” he said. Al Gore, the former Democratic vice-president and climate advocate, said Republican-led anti-ESG bills were part of a “new wave of climate denial”. “The weight of the absurdity is impressive . . . Their policies and their ideology cannot survive in a world that really pays attention to truth and the rule of law,” Gore said.

The comments from senior Democrats at a Ceres conference on Thursday come amid an escalating conflict over the Biden administration’s clean energy strategy and a Republican backlash against the environmental, social and governance movement on Wall Street.

Biden issued the first veto of his term this week, rejecting a Republican bill to ban retirement funds from considering ESG matters such as climate change in their investment decisions. More than half of US states have made efforts to crack down on ESG investing in public retirement funds, according to a tracker by Ropes & Gray. The law firm has tracked at least 50 anti-ESG bills introduced so far in 2023, more than double the entirety of last year. Florida’s Republican governor and potential presidential candidate Ron DeSantis is among the loudest critics of ESG, calling the practice “woke capitalism” and a threat to financial returns.

DeSantis rallied 18 governors into an alliance last week to curb ESG investing at the state level.“All these people fretting about ‘woke capitalism’ don’t actually seem to believe in capitalism,” Podesta said. “Because if you ignore risk [such as climate change], you’re going to end up losing a lot of money and it’s irresponsible.”

[Financial Times]

#Horsey #climate change #energy industry #Financial times #investors #Maga ideology #free market #clean energy #ESG

4 notes · View notes

ausetkmt · 2 years ago

Text

"Finding Zion, a Black cemetery time forgot in Tampa"

youtube

Lost African American Cemetery Found Under Florida Parking Lot

Nora McGreevy

Residents of Clearwater Heights, a historically black neighborhood in Clearwater, Florida, have long shared rumors of unmarked graves left behind when an all-black cemetery was moved to another town in the 1950s.

Now, an archaeological survey has confirmed this speculation, reports Paul Guzzo for the Tampa Bay Times. According to records obtained by the Times, researchers recently used ground-penetrating radar (GPR) to analyze a patch of land in the Tampa Bay community. Though a paved parking lot covers most of the site, a business complex owned by staffing firm FrankCrum occupies a small portion of the land.

Archaeologists discovered 70 possible graves just below the surface of the lot, says Jeff Moates of the Florida Public Archaeology Network. The team only surveyed a fifth of the 2.5-acre cemetery plot, raising the possibility that more graves may be hidden at the site.

The St. Matthew Missionary Baptist Church established the cemetery in 1909. When the church sold the land in 1955, most of the bodies buried in the graveyard were moved to another African American cemetery in nearby Dunedin. But some of the graves were unmarked, and they appear to have been left behind during the move.

Over the next 50 years, the plot of land hosted a department store, an administrative building and a technology firm. In 2004, FrankCrum purchased the site, unaware of the forgotten graves on-site, according to the Times.

The new discovery is the latest in a string of key historical finds across Tampa Bay. In the past year alone, research spearheaded by local reporters has led to the identification of four historical black cemeteries in the area.

Two years ago, Times journalists acting on a tip from local historian Ray Reed realized that the city’s first all-black graveyard, Zion Cemetery, was buried beneath land now occupied by the Tampa Housing Authority and restaurant warehouses.

Using GPR, researchers discovered more than 300 unmarked graves. Their findings, published in June 2019, led to the rediscovery of other cemeteries in the area, including a nearly all-black grave site hidden beneath a Tampa high school.

That these black cemeteries have been neglected or “lost” to time is no accident, but rather the result of systemic racism, reports Emerald Morrow for local broadcast station WTSP. During the Reconstruction era following the Civil War, Jim Crow laws effectively barred black people from owning property—a restriction that forced African Americans out of neighborhoods where they had lived for generations.

As Morrow explains, “At the time, racism and segregation meant African Americans lacked the political and economic power to hold onto their property and sacred institutions like cemeteries. And it’s the buildup of these injustices over time that have led to outrage in the black community today.”

Spurred by the recent spate of discoveries, experts from the University of South Florida and the Florida Public Archaeology Network are researching unmarked graves and working to identify the people buried within.

“We die twice,” says USF librarian Drew Smith in a statement. “We die when our physical body dies, but we also die when the last person speaks our name. We can bring these people back because we can begin talking about them and speaking their names again.”

As Jacey Fortin and Johnny Diaz reported for the New York Times last November, efforts to preserve abandoned or neglected historical black cemeteries are ongoing across the country.

In February 2019, Congressional lawmakers introduced the African-American Burial Grounds Network Act, which seeks to create a national database of historic black cemeteries under the auspices of the National Park Service, according to Caitlin Byrd of the Post and Courier.

More recently, the Mass Graves Investigation Public Oversight Committee announced plans to dig for suspected mass graves linked to the Tulsa Race Massacre, as DeNeen L. Brown reported for the Washington Post in February. In 1921, a white mob attacked and destroyed the prosperous black neighborhood of Greenwood, killing an estimated 300 black Tulsans. Public interest in the search for the mass graves has intensified as the centennial of the massacre approaches, wrote Jason Daley for Smithsonian magazine in 2018.

Work aimed at unearthing and preserving historic black burial sites has taken on new urgency as protests against racism and police brutality erupt across the country.

As historian Fred Hearns tells the Tampa Bay Times, “[Y]ou can’t hide the truth. It will be dug up. Those young people out in the street inherited our rage. Until we tell the whole truth, there will always be a lingering evil—like the cemeteries—waiting to pop its head up.”

#Finding Zion #a Black cemetery time forgot in Tampa #Zion Cemetery #Florida #Black History of Tampa #Lost African American Cemetery Found Under Florida Parking Lot

3 notes · View notes

justinspoliticalcorner · 7 months ago

Text

Lisa Needham at Public Notice:

It was likely only a matter of time before right-wing federal judges decided to weigh in on student protests over the ongoing slaughter of Palestinians. And, these judges being the reactionaries they are, their contribution to the discourse is not designed to provide solutions or even to advance a coherent worldview. Instead, it’s just some good old-fashioned hippie-punching. On Monday, 13 federal judges, led by Trump appointees James Ho of the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals and Lisa Branch of the Eleventh Circuit, sent a letter to the president of Columbia University, Minouche Shafik. They stated they would no longer hire as law clerks anyone who attends Columbia University — the undergraduate and the law school — starting with the entering class of 2024.

This isn’t the first time Ho and Branch have pulled this stunt. In the fall of 2022, they both declared they would no longer hire law clerks from Yale Law School after students disrupted speeches by right-wing speakers. In March 2023, they extended their boycott to Stanford after students heckled fellow Trump appointee Judge Kyle Duncan. This time around, they’re joined in the letter to Columbia by 11 other Trump-appointed judges (Alan Albright, David Counts, James W. Hendrix, Matthew J. Kacsmaryk, Jeremy D. Kernodle, Tilman E. Self III, Matthew H. Solomson, Brantley Starr, Drew B. Tipton, Daniel M. Traynor, and Stephen Alexander Vaden). The esteemed jurists have three demands for Columbia — but they don’t provide any facts, context, or legal reasoning to underpin them. At only two pages, this is a thin little screed, particularly given that fully one-third of a page is just the list of the judges’ names.

[...]

Quixotically, the people who will be most hurt by this are conservative students. The progressive students out protesting right now don’t want to clerk for judges like this. Right-wing students who might have contemplated attending Columbia will presumably go elsewhere, meaning the viewpoint diversity the judges demand won’t happen either. When Judge Ho announced his Yale clerk boycott, a Yale student asked him exactly this: “How will we fix the culture of students … if all of the conservatives suddenly boycott Yale with the judges?” Ho didn’t have an answer, instead saying that “if someone has a better idea, I am all ears” and that “the objective is very simple, it’s to restore free speech.” These judges are only part of the current right-wing project to redefine free speech and tolerance as the absence of diversity. They’re joined by people like New York Republican Rep. Elise Stefanik, who has pushed the “great replacement theory” that Democrats are importing millions of undocumented immigrants to replace white voters. This is a theory endorsed by the marchers at Charlottesville and grounded in the antisemitic belief that Jews are behind the plan. These days, Stefanik is a self-styled protector of Jewish students, holding hearings to harangue university administrators over their ostensibly antisemitic behavior and celebrating when she gets them fired.

There’s also Christopher Rufo, who has helped with everything from destroying Florida’s public university system to ousting former Harvard president Claudine Gay. There’s former Trump senior advisor Stephen Miller, whose “America First Legal” law firm exists largely to file lawsuits to block any government initiative that attempts to redress historical wrongs against people of color. And there are any number of feckless state legislators who are eradicating all diversity initiatives in their states. At root, this is a profoundly cynical enterprise. None of this is borne out of concern for Jewish students. Rather, they serve as a convenient prop for the latest iteration of MAGA bombast. None of these people will ever confront the antisemitism at the core of their party and that Trump, their presumptive presidential nominee, has a decades-long history of stoking. These judges will continue to use their lifetime appointments to roll back rights for everyone they don’t like and they will continue to demand that schools show them fealty. Meanwhile, the students they loathe will continue to risk their safety and their future by standing in solidarity with people thousands of miles away. The kids, as they say, are alright.

13 right-wing judicial activists serving on various federal courts sent a letter to Columbia University’s scandal-tarred President Minouche Shafik that they will not hire any Columbia attender for law clerk positions in the future as part of the overblown right-wing moral panic about antisemitism on college campuses.

#Judiciary #Columbia University #Campus Protests #Israel/Hamas War #Judicial Nominations #Courts #Lisa Branch #James Ho #Judicial Activism #Elise Stefanik #Christopher F. Rufo #Minouche Shafik

3 notes · View notes