Loyola Marymount University student Stephanie Martinez is exactly what schools seek in admissions. She is politically and socially active. She has been involved in the school’s governance and community, including serving at the government senator for diversity and inclusion. She is also conservative. That last element proved unacceptable recently when fellow students impeached her after a three-hour proceeding because she expressed her opposition to illegal immigration on social media. While a few students protested, other students mocked the outcry and the coverage on sites like The College Fix. One student is quoted on social media as saying “it’s a f***ing seat on a random student government senate. Why are these old white people so upset!?” The answer is something that is becoming less and less of a concern on campuses: free speech.We have seen other students recently subjected to similar actions by their student governments or by fellow editors on student newspapers. Free speech is under attack across the country and polling shows a falling level of support for free speech among students. The actions taken against openly conservative or libertarian students are having an impact on both students and faculty who are self-censoring to avoid similar attacks.In this case, the student government is acting to counter Martinez’s views on immigration. In one of the offending postings, Martinez wrote “The same people advocating for rights, equality, and better conditions for illegal aliens are the same one censoring freedom of speech (a right), defaming and initiating hostility for those Americans with divergent views! Sad!” It proved a prophetic and ironic posting for Martinez. Fellow Diversity and Inclusion student Senator Camille Orozco cited such statements as the basis for impeachment under Article 8 in the student body bylaws as “conduct that severely damages the integrity or authority of ASLMU or the office held by the individual in question.” Orozco dismissed the obvious crackdown on free speech by declaring conclusorily that it is not about free speech but “conduct which has severely damaged the integrity, or authority of ASLMU or the office held by Senator Martinez.” But the “conduct” was the free speech. That is how easy it is to strip away any tolerance for opposing viewpoints. Orozco argued that the views of Martinez hurt the relationship of the student government with immigrant groups.The most glaring moment came when Director of Free Speech & Expression Robyn De Leon rose to speak. This is the person who is supposed to protect free speech and expression but spoke in favor of removing someone on the basis of her opposing viewpoints. According to one article, De Leon said that Martinez is not protected for her “very alienating of unrepresented and marginalized communities” and cited her use of the term “illegal alien.” Putting aside the obvious hypocrisy in that position, De Leon ignores that federal courts, including the Supreme Court, have used the term “illegal alien.”What concerns me most is the apparent silence of the university. Under the student government’s Constitution, no officer or member will be discriminated against based on their political affiliation. I do not know the specific views of Martinez on politics or immigration. Indeed, I do not consider her specific viewpoints to be particularly relevant beyond the fact that such viewpoints are being used as the basis for adverse actions. She has a right to speak her mind on social media and a university should celebrate the diversity of such ideas as part of its intellectual mission. Yet, I could find no statement of the university denouncing any action that punishes a student or faculty member for their opposing viewpoints. I can understand not wanting to interfere with student governance decisions but the university should not be a mere pedestrian to the abuse of a student for her political views. The university would clearly condemn any action if was deemed racist or offensive. The denial of free speech would be of an equal concern for the university in guaranteeing a tolerant and open academic community.
Martinez’s next course of action is to appeal the impeachment. If she loses, she will face a removal trial. That is why the university must be clear as to its commitment to free speech. Student governments are not invitation to institute Robespierrean justice. The university needs to act to protect those who are being attacked for their dissenting views and to reaffirm the guarantee of free speech at Loyola Marymount University.
Meanwhile, a prayer for France:
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/oct/16/french-police-shoot-man-dead-after-knife-attack-near-paris-school
Any thoughts on free speech naturalization requirements for Muslim immigrants?
Good discussion of free speech vs defamation of the Prophet Muhammad in European context here:
https://www.theosthinktank.co.uk/comment/2018/10/26/q-have-european-judges-just-banned-defamation-of-the-prophet-muhammad-a-no
What does “free speech naturalization requirements for Muslim immigrants” mean? (what requirements, and why for Muslim immigrants but not other immigrants?)
Those are the questions. Put another way, what kind of citizenship programming should exist between Muslim countries of origin and western countries of destination?
https://dash.harvard.edu/bitstream/handle/1/4481625/Norris_MuslimIntegration.pdf
I googled “Charlie Hebdo Cartoons” after reading the article about the French teacher’s decapitation and then I took a look at the US Citizenship and Immigration Services website section on Civic Assimilation – Settling in the US:
https://www.uscis.gov/citizenship-resource-center/civic-assimilation/settling-in-the-us
“We also offer a comprehensive guide, Welcome to the United States: A Guide for New Immigrants. It has practical information to help you settle into everyday life in the United States. It also contains basic civics information that introduces you to the U.S. system of government. You can download free copies in 14 languages.”
I scanned the Arabic welcome manual and asked myself if the images it includes are instructional enough to help a Muslim immigrant understand the distinctions between free speech (visual), obscenity (visual) and defamation of religion (visual) in the US as compared to 1) other western countries, e.g., Austria and 2) Muslim countries.
Then I imagined that as part of the US naturalization exam for Muslims, I was asked to flip through a picture-book and check the kinds of images about Islam that are against the law in the US and the kinds of images about Islam that are allowed.
Would that be illegal discrimination on the basis of religion, or culturally competent naturalization programming?
I don’t understand why you’re imagining anything about the naturalization exam instead of reading the questions: https://www.uscis.gov/sites/default/files/document/questions-and-answers/100q.pdf
I don’t understand why you’re focused on Muslim countries of origin in the first place. I also hope you understand that many Muslim people live in countries that are not Muslim and that many foreign Muslim people don’t speak Arabic (Indonesia, Malaysia, and Mali are among the Muslim countries with other national languages).
Anonymous:
“I don’t understand why you’re focused on Muslim countries of origin in the first place.”
It’s a natural starting point for multicultural understanding:
https://www.pewforum.org/2017/11/29/europes-growing-muslim-population/
“I also hope you understand that many Muslim people live in countries that are not Muslim and that many foreign Muslim people don’t speak Arabic…”
Yes, I understand. The Muslim murderer of the Charlie Hebdo image-sharing French teacher I cited at the start of this comment thread is allegedly from Chechnya, and he lived in France. Russia, while it is home to a sizeable Muslim minority, is not a Muslim majority country. Does this mean Muslim immigrants/refugees from Chechnya to the US don’t warrant culturally competent naturalization programming?
Of course not all Muslims speak Arabic, and not all Arabs are Muslims:
https://www.encounteringislam.org/muslim-world-facts
But Arabic is the language of the Quran, most Arabs are Muslims (~93%) and it seems reasonable to ask whether a US assimilation guide for Arabic speakers should not include first amendment-testing images. Ditto the naturalization exam.
the naturalization process here is a joke. really, it’s just a joke
trump admin has shocked the devil out of lawyers because the USCIS is finally reading applications and checking facts and deferring people who have obviously lied
but they are still “passing” people who can barely speak English and have pretty close to no concept of American civics
My Prayer is to Charles Martel. Gee, I forgot, he’s not a Saint. And yet we really need the Hammer
Off-topic: Chinese fish thievery
https://www.newsmax.com/evanellis/chile-deepwater-eez-galapagos/2020/10/16/id/992375/
On the largest scale….
They are stealing a lot and fish are only part of it.
I wonder what the Chinese spy who was Feinstein’s driver as able to steal.
The topic is a hot one in medical research. Chinese are stealing data, new and evolving paradigms being investigated by medical scientists globally, and taking it for their own. No ethics whatsoever
Meanwhile COVID is displacing all other areas of medical investigation. The funding is all geared towards COVID. All patients with medical diseases not COVID related are getting screwed. Investigators questioning the current zeitgeist are penalized
see
https://www.bma.org.uk/events/international-conference-on-physician-health-2021
International conference on physician health 2021: a vision for humanity in medicine
Monday 26 April 2021, 9.00am
This online conference aims to support doctors to create better working environments for themselves and their colleagues.
We are unable to consider any additional work without a strong COVID-19 focus.
the journals need to get better at disclosing what ORC authors are working for the PLA and what Western co-authors are on the payroll too
early um garbage on covid came from an Australian doctor who fits the bill, forgot his name
prc
At least her daily routine for decades. That’s all. And so easily
Imagine what clever spies could do with that. A senior Senator in a key turf saturated with PRC migrants
Oy vey
Is “illegal alien” a “hurtful and alienating” form of public expression?
https://www.cato.org/blog/illegal-alien-one-many-correct-legal-terms-illegal-immigrant
Text of HR 3776, submitted by Rep. Castro (D-TX-20):
https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/house-bill/3776/text?
Who cares?
Every comment gives me an opportunity to learn something new, Young.
It doesn’t look like Trump has reached common ground with Chairman Alexander (R-TN) on WHO membership and reform:
https://www.help.senate.gov/chair/newsroom/press/chairman-alexander-statement-on-world-health-organization
“US Democratic challenger Joe Biden has said he will reverse President Donald Trump’s move to withdraw from the World Health Organization (WHO) ‘on day one’ if he wins November’s election.”
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-53332354
I care because in certain states if you use the term in court, it can get you disciplined, even if it’s relevant
the pc term is ‘undocumented migrant”
see rpc 8.4– the ever growing tool of censorship of lawyer speech
I checked mine and it is so broad I am not sure. Perhaps the opinions cover it but I am not going through those. I am not practicing so I am not sure I worry about it. I do wonder about my comments in cle sessions. Luckily I missed the one on handling Islamaphobia. I likely would have said stop killing people and we will stop the phobia. They are working on that phobia in France today. Another beheading.
When I was young nobody was beheaded and you didn’t have to go through security to board a plane or enter a government building.
I attended college from ’68-’72 and witnessed all the rioting firsthand. And now that I’ve seen all the current rioting, not firsthand but through the marvel of camera phones, I find the differences astounding. The most fundamental being 60s Berkeley radicals, the most radical of the radical, demonstrated for free speech. The current crop of loonies demonstrate against free speech. And all in the span of 50 years. We have become our own existential threat.
The problem with packaging any nationality (Hispanic) and Illegal immigration is misguided. The majority of the Hispanic’s in America do not associate their heritage to illegal immigrates. I would say to these Whetta’s stick your head somewhere where the sun doesn’t shine. We don’t need your protection and we can stand on our on two feet!
Jonathan: Trying to watch the separate Biden/Trump town hall broadcasts last night gave me a splitting headache. It’s like trying to read your latest column on my i-Phone and simultaneously reading the latest news on my laptop. There’s a dissonance that also gives me a headache. While you are lamenting the alleged suppression of conservative free speech at Loyal Marymount University the outside world is dealing with free speech issues almost every day–like voter suppression. Everyone agrees that the right to vote is the ultimate form of free speech. It’s a precious right we all cherish. But Trump and his allies, inside and outside the Republican Party, are trying their best to take that right away from millions of Americans. Here are two recent examples:
We all know the KKK wrote the playbook on voter suppression. They’re at it again. Earlier this week the KKK went around a black neighborhood in Shelbyville, Tennessee tearing down “Biden/Harris” posters and leaving their calling cards that read: “You have been paid a social visit by the Knights of the Ku Klux Klan. Don’t make the next visit a business call”. Shocking but typical of the KKK. Trump has found allies in the strangest places.
In California Trump’s GOP is doing something almost as bad. In LA, Orange and Fresno counties the GOP has set up fake voter drop off boxes in front of churches, party headquarters, gyms and gun stores. They are labelled “official”. The California Attorney General has declared the fake boxes illegal and ordered them removed because they don’t comply with state election law. The GOP has refused saying that under the 2016 “ballot harvesting” law they are entitled to collect ballots even though the collection boxes aren’t “official”. In fact, the GOP says it is going to extend the practice. Under the law a friend, not just a family member, can submit a ballot on behalf of the voter. The friend must sign the outside envelope and designate their status. This is especially important this year because of the cornoavirus when seniors and other shut-ins can’t or don’t want to go out. The GOP originally opposed the 2016 legislation falsely claiming it would result in massive voter fraud. Nothing of the sort has happened and this method of voting has been used in several elections. Unlike Trump and his Republican state allies California wants to make it easier to vote. Now the curious would like to know what does the GOP in California intend to do with the ballots it collects. They can’t know how the voter voted without tampering with the envelope and this would be a federal crime. Trying to figure this out has given me another headache!
What happens at Loyola Marymount pales in comparison to what Trump and his allies are doing to prevent voters from exercising their precious right of free speech. That’s a focus you obviously want to avoid.
I do not equate the Democrats with the KKK eventhoough the KKK was affillated with the Democratic Party in it’s heyday. When you equate the Republican Party with the KKK you lost 90 per cent of us. With your logic, though it’s not true, I would have to assume that all McIntyres are bigots.
Turley’s focus: https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/hunter-biden-computer-facebook-trump-censorship-scandal-jonathan-turley
Excellent article.
On the other side: Russian Disinformation Campaign?
https://www.businessinsider.com/biden-laptop-real-fake-russian-intelligence-2020-10
Following up on your second link, “The FBI is investigating whether emails that were published by the New York Post related to Joe Biden’s son, Hunter, are connected to a possible Russian influence operation to spread disinformation, according to a person familiar with the matter.”
https://apnews.com/article/election-2020-joe-biden-russia-024b553e9a4ffb2716286dd134876f8a
disinformation? That sounds like Newspeak to me. When audio, video and/or documents reveal wrongdoing and corruption, it is now considered misinformation if it was not approved for release.
We still don’t know whether the laptop was Hunter Biden’s. We still don’t know whether the emails on it are real or fake. If they’re fake, they could easily be Russian disinformation. Russia would rather that Trump be reelected.
So you admit that at this point, there is at least information. So until it’s fully investigated, the only disinformation campaign being waged is by you and your ilk.
So I stand by my previous comment.
Big picture, Giuliani’s role in this story raises about as many questions as the official narrative concerning WTC7:
https://nymag.com/news/9-11/10th-anniversary/building-seven/
Big picture, I haven’t yet been convinced to disagree with Stephen Cohen on US/NATO-Russian relations:
https://www.theguardian.com/education/2020/oct/13/stephen-cohen-obituary
“He passionately opposed what he felt was blind anti-Russian hysteria and the demonization of Vladimir Putin. “In the three cases widely given as examples of Putin’s ‘aggression’ the evidence points to US-led instigation,” he wrote. The proxy US-Russian war in Georgia in 2008 was started by the US-backed Georgian president who had been encouraged to aspire to NATO membership. The crisis and war in Ukraine resulted from Washington’s long-standing effort to bring that country into NATO despite Ukraine’s shared civilization with Russia. Putin’s intervention in Syria was done on a valid premise: to defeat the Islamic State group after Obama refused to join Russia in an anti-Isis alliance.”
Trump and Biden both have their hands full.
ha ha Jonathan why get started on WTC 7. Now that’s the rabbit hole of all rabbit holes.
Well if I guess the Pentagon can release 3 videos of UFOs taped by F-16 pilots that in its essence reverses decades of lies by the US, maybe one day we will know why that building pancaked on its own footprint so fast. Sure looked like a demo to me, jus’ syain.. But I won’t hold my breath for new info nor belabor it here
As for Putin he is a national leader and a national adversary. One that is armed to the teeth with hundreds of big nukes but now hypersonic missiles that can get here in a trice and good luck shooting them down. For my part, I urge diplomacy and de-escalation with Russia, and allowing them a secure sphere of influence contiguous to their borders to achieve it.
I voted in Trump in part because he promised de-escalation with Russia and for four years I have been sick at the Democrat war pigs and their never ending frustration of all reasonable diplomatic engagements with Putin via their false impeachment narrative
And how long has the FBI had the hard drive I dare ask? According to Rudy a month or more. Deep State Anyone?
If the subpoena image in the NYP is accurate (rather than being a subpoena for something else), they’ve had it since last December.
That doesn’t imply anything about a “deep state”, since they’re not supposed to talk publicly investigations unless they charge someone.
The more sensible explanation is that they either didn’t find any chargeable offenses or they’re still investigating. The bigger question is when did Rudy get this and why was he silent about it for so long.
That’s your bigger question? Let me guess, when Dith Pran escaped from the Khmer Rouge, your bigger question would be why didn’t he report it earlier than he did?
“conduct which has severely damaged the integrity, or authority of ASLMU or the office held.”
Talk about a MASSIVE projection. That’s you, you brainhumped numbskull. Your conduct is the issue, not Martinez’s. This is a problem with leftists in general. They’re so desperate to be heroes in some kind of civil rights movement, that they stir one up, and immediately throw themselves onto the wrong side. They’re the ones dumping drinks on people. They’re the ones throwing eggs and rocks and worse. They’re the ones hurling racial epithets. They’re the ones harassing and threatening.
You’ve got yourself the civil rights movement you wanted, but you’re the ones violating civil rights. Ridiculous.
Are we still surprised by this?
The ‘diversity’ crowd requires strict unanimity.
Lorenzo, actually I think the socalled Left has some major fault lines
The first and biggest are those who remain focused on economics, who are fewer and fewer as time goes by–
versus those who are just on board for social rebranding and conflict along the lines of race, gender, etc
one might call the first group, socialists, and the second, poseurs and tools
there are also major problems between American leftists and overseas leftists, and often the overseas ones are more focused on economics, while the poseurs are dismally ignorant
there is also a huge fault line where nationalism comes in. Asian communism over decades has had a strongly nationalist hue.
Communism a la Trotsky– the variety enjoyed by most academic blabbermouths– reviles nationalism,.
lots of implications for what Bannon calls “economic nationalism”
“Putting aside the obvious hypocrisy in that position, De Leon ignores that federal courts, including the Supreme Court, have used the term “illegal alien.””
Perhaps the Professor should be careful. Does he know that as I have often warned in his comments area, lawyers are under a form of creeping censorship, under RPC 8.4, in which certain states have already staked out the position that this term is “unethical”?
case from a DECADE ago
https://secure.in.gov/judiciary/files/atty-disc-2009-71s00-0807-di-400.pdf
Maybe since Prof Turley is a free speech advocate and writes so much about academic freedom of speech, and yet he is also a lawyer, he would be so kind as to draw attention to the creeping censorship– of lawyers? Please?
The matter was “on the docket” at the recent ABA convention too
There were brave Americans who used their right of free speech to stand against racist who wanted ostracise, demean and kick out. These techniques were used in The Soviet Union and the German Third Reich. Opposing positions were not allowed and those he voiced them were subject to dire retribution. Don’t any of these colleges have any history books in their libraries?
Where do you think they learned their “non-violent tactics”?
It is ALWAYS the same groups ….
Is this the direction we are headed? I think one of the posters mentioned these students may likely be government workers.
Life in the Soviet:
“Freedom of speech was suppressed and dissent was punished. Independent political activities were not tolerated, whether these involved participation in free labour unions, private corporations, independent churches or opposition political parties.”