Four years ago, we first discussed the case of Professor Jason Kilborn, who was investigated and punished for using a pair of racial slurs as part of an exam in his civil procedure course. I was critical of the actions of the John Marshall Law School at the University of Illinois (Chicago) as inimical to both free speech and academic freedom. Now, the United States Court of Appeals has reversed a district court’s dismissal of his free speech claims. The UofI will continue to spend huge amounts of money in fighting the protections for academics in their classrooms. It is not simply administrators wasting public funds, but spending public funds against the public interest.
Professor Kilborn’s Civil Procedure II exam described how an employee quit “after she attended a meeting in which other managers expressed their anger at Plaintiff, calling her a ‘n___’ and ‘b___’ [sic].”
The use of the racial slurs led to a complaint in a letter from the Black Law Students Association and later a petition which called for Kilborn to be stripped of his committee assignments and other reforms. The Petition stated:
The slur shocked students created a momentous distraction and caused unnecessary distress and anxiety for those taking the exam. Considering the subject matter, and the call of the question, the use of the “n____” and “b____” was certainly unwarranted as it did not serve any educational purpose. The question was culturally insensitive and tone-deaf. It lacked basic civility and respect for the student body, especially considering our social justice efforts this year.
The integration of this dark and vile verbiage on a Civil Procedure II exam was inexcusable and appropriate measures of accountability must be executed by the UIC administration.
My objection was to the measures taken against Professor Kilborn, which I do believe undermine academic freedom. He was suspended and put on administrative leave because of a complaint that in my view was a denial of his pedagogical privileges. He was ultimately denied a raise. He was also required to undergo drug testing, agree to a medical examination, and complete eight weeks of diversity training.
I was also concerned by the position of University of Illinois-Chicago Chancellor Michael Amiridis when the university disputed the claim that the use of the terms was “pedagogical relevant” or “necessarily germane to the study of civil procedure.” That is a statement that drives to the very core of academic freedom.
Just because Kilborn teaches Civil Procedure does not mean that hypotheticals raising racial discrimination are not germane. The best Civil Procedure teachers show how these rules can raise difficult political, social, and constitutional issues when applied in different contexts. Moreover, professors have been pushed by universities and various academic groups to incorporate greater consideration of social justice and racial equality issues in their classes.
Professor Kilborn wrote an exam question that included the censored versions of words that are commonly found in media articles and academic publications. For that, he was publicly suspended and ostracized.
An appellate court’s decision found the lower court erred in dismissing Kilborn’s retaliation claim without giving a full consideration to his First Amendment protections.
The panel declined to apply Garcetti v. Ceballos, 547 U.S. 410, 418 (2006) as controlling. In that case, the Supreme Court found that public employees are not speaking as citizens when they make statements pursuant to their official duties.” The panel held:
“We decline the University officials’ invitation to extend Garcetti to speech involving university teaching and scholar-ship when the Supreme Court was unwilling to do so. Nor are we alone. Every other circuit to decide the issue has recognized that Garcetti does not apply to university teaching or scholarship.’
According to a FOIA request from the University of Illinois system, UIC Law has already burned through $1.2 million in the case. Rather than discipline these officials who denied basic protections for Kilborn, the school continues to add to the costly effort in the court.
The question is how long the university will burn through funds to fight these core rights afforded to all professors.
Here is the decision: Kilborn v. Amiridis
ROBERTS, BOASBERG, CHUTKAN, ABELSON ET AL. – CONQUEST OF THE AMERICA BY THE KRITOCRACY, NAY, THE KAKISTOCRACY!
cacastocracy
Boy, JT sure has some heavy topics he has uncovered. Wow, such intellect JT.
Meanwhile, the President laughs and taunts a Federal judge.
And what is all this BS about Canada?
“You’re tougher with Canada than you are with some of our biggest adversaries. Why?” Ingraham asked.
“Only because it’s meant to be our 51st state,” Trump replied.
The president added that Canada is “one of the nastiest countries to deal with.”
What the hell is wrong with trump? Oh never mind, he lost his mind ages ago. The real question is why do you still support him?
Sure buddy. Keep flooding the country with illegals and fentanyl. Keep using taxpayer money to fund phony NGO’s and using foreign oligarchs to enrich corrupt Democrats. Keep using a war to launder campaign donations through ActBlue. Keep spending us into bankruptcy while failing miserably on every major education metric. All that makes so much more sense than Trump trolling wack jobs in Ottawa and the runaway liberal courts.
The problem with all of you liberals is you have never had a sense of proportion. You will never be happy until the George Floyds of the world kiss your ring. I got a news bulletin, friend. Move to South Africa and find out what really makes leftwing, black politicians happy.
Federal judges are appointed, ultimately by Congress, not for Congress. The Executive Branch of the Administration can freely ignore them.
Did you poo-poo Biden when he went against SCOTUS multiple times over money (i.e. loans)? Because that’s an actual infringement from the Executive on both the Legislative AND Judicial branches.
Article 1, Section 8: Congress has the power to tax for and fund ONLY debt, defense, and “general Welfare.” Student loans, and their rescission, do not constitute any one. “General Welfare” is comprised of basic infrastructure such as roads, water, post office, electricity, internet et al. and is defined as all or the whole, not one, some, or a few, and not individual welfare, specific welfare, particular welfare, favor, or charity.
Was going to work towards that, but you have to start small so Baby’s braincells don’t get scared off
Federal Judges are appointed by the president and confirmed by congress.
They are a separate branch of governemnt – and the executive is obligated to obey their orders – even when bogus.
Roberts is absolutely correct in what he has posted.
What he repeatedly misses is that HE – the Cheif Justice is the final check BEFORE impeachment on Rogue judges and HE – Roberts has failed.
The argument that most left wing judges are not politically biased and partisan is CRAP and everyone knows it. When they get overruled by SCOTUS on questions that involve policy – an are that is distinctly OUTSIDE the jurisdiction of the courts – the claim of bias is self evidently proven.
Our system – which allows judges to issue orders that the rest of the country MUST obey – only works when those judges confine their cases and their orders to the law, and constitution.
Constitutionally the courts have absolutely no policy role AT ALL. They are not allowed to think about where something is a good idea or a bad idea in their decisions. Policy matters are the exclusive domain of elected officials – the president and congress, and judgements on policy are made by VOTERS – not courts.
The power of Judges to issue orders that must be obeyed only works if those judges stay OUT of policy matters and confine themselves strictly to the law and constitution.
With extremely few exceptions hiring and firing in the executive is the exclusive domain of the president. To the extent that those fired have any right to challenge their rtermination in court – that is as an equity action – ie. they can receive damages if they can establish their firing was illegal. They can not get their job back and no judge can order the president to cease firing people, nor can a judge decide who within the executive can fire people – that power belongs exclusively to the president.
The fiscal management of the executive is the exclusive domain of the president. He can audit spending whereever he pleases and order whoever he wishes to perform that audit. He can cut wasteful or fraudulent spending however he sees fit – constrained only by the budget passed by congress. Further while questions as to the presidents performance of budget requirement are legitimate issues for the courts – Only congress has standing to challenge a presidents implimentation of the budget.
No court in the country has the unilaterally authority to rule on issues that are not legitmately before them.
Courts do not have the power to issue advisory oppinons.
If you are in the United states and you are not a citizen and you do not have a green card or a visa, then the president has the nearly limitless power and duty to remove you. The only legal right you have is to a habeus review – and that only to establish that
you are not a citizen. you are not a legal resident and you are not here on a legal visa. That is the limits of the authority of the courts.
I would note that is true – without addressing the AEA. The AEA further empowers the executive to remove someone who is not a citizen but is in the US legally, When their country of origin has committed hostile acts against the US. Again the only power of the courts is to determine that you are NOT a US citizen and that you are a citizen of that foreign government.
Everyone in the country is obligated to obey the illegal orders of courts.
When those are the normal rare mistakes of lower courts – the remedy is for the appelate courts to overrule the lower courts.
When that becomes a pattern of abuse – and especially when it is a lawless pattern of abuse that reflects the prefered policies of judges rather than those of the electorate as expressed by their elected representatives in congress and the president, further remedies are necescary.
The first of these is for the cheif Justice to use his administrative power over the federal judiciary to admonish them and to seek corrective measures.
When that fails or is not done – then the house may impeach rogue judges.
We have done that rarely in the past for good reason. We have not had the judicial interferance in public policy that we are seeing by the left on any significant scale until recently.
We have not had a pattern of abuse.
Our constitutional system does not work – when the courts assume executive and legislative powers.
That is another step towards banana Republic.
Those of you on the left do not seem to grasp that the US does not have a court system – like that of Brazil – where the courts have the power to do pretty much whatever they want.
BT – what does your comment mean ? Beyond I do not like Trump ?
Several people hear have pointed out that Judge Boasberg does not have any jurisdiction in this case – per US supreme court decisions in 1950.
Yes, the president should disrespect federal judges who disrespect the law and constitution.
Frankly the Boasberg case is completely Absurd. In what world do those of you on the left think that thwarting the deportation of Tren De Arugua members is a good idea ?
Neitehr you nor the judge appear to understand reality. Tren De Aragua is a Venezuelan prison gang. Its members are all from a specific prison in Venezeula, they were released by Maduro on the condition that the left Venezeula and came to the US. NGO’s funded by Sorros fascilitated their transport to the US. If you are a member of Tren De Aragua – you are a criminal who illegally entered the US.
And most of the american people legitimately want you gone ASAP.
This judge got this case because the ACLU claimed that 5 people being deported as Tren De ARagua members – were not Tren De Aragua members. Establishing that is the extent of the judges jurisdiction of this case. Frankly even determining that they are or are not Tren De Aragua is not inside the Judges jurisdiction – per the Supreme court in 1950. ICE can deport them if they are merely Venezuelan. It can deport them if they are here legally. If they never committed a crime – either in the US or in Venezeula or anywhere else.
The supreme court already ruled decades ago that the president had the power to deport the peaceful citizens of a hostile country who were legally in the US using the AEA and that his decision to do so was NOT subject to judicial review.
It is the Judge in this case that is lawless.
All that the judge and those of you on the left are doing is HIGHLIGHTING your willingness to use what power you have with partisan judges to ignore the law to get your way.
Worse still – what you seek to accomplish in this case is keeping some of the most violent criminals in the world in the US.
You are wrong on the law and wrong on the politics and wrong on the messaging and too stupid to grasp that.
Boasberg should resign.
Roberts rather than attacking those seeking to remedy this growing problem of Lawfare – should be reigning in Judges like Boasberg – tellin him to get his act together and learn the law before meddling where he has no business.
BT – what is wrong with YOU !
Honestly ?
Trump is doing fine – as are super majorities of american people – many of whom did not vote for Trump who support what he is doing.
In Trump’s first term – Trump took lots of crap from supposedly poorly crafted EO’s etc – but Trump has turned the tables – His legal team is far better this time. The EO’s are well crafted – he is also working with quality people at each level that he has appointed. The expected much of this lawfare and are well prepared for it, and it is the left wing nut lawsuits and the hastily and poorly crafted judicial injucunctions that read like they were written by a 4th grader.
Trumps approval fluctuates between a low of 50 and a high of 53 – but there is no downward trend.
While Democrats are cratering. If the midterms were tomorow Democrats would be obliterated.
I just reveiwed the latest TRO from an idiot federal judge in MD – it is all over the place – it is completely full of claims that other left wing nut courts have already rejected. Several new orders he has issued – have previously been littigated in other federal courts and have been resolved in Trumps favor – and it is not like these were from SCOTUS cases 7 decades ago – these were issues either decided by SCOTUS in the past 3 years of decided by Federal Courts in the past 60 days.
Bit ny Bit Trump will win almost all these cases, it is NOT likely to take 2 years. In many instances the courts are saying stupid things like Musk can not act (he didin’t Rubio or Trump did) and that Rubio must act while standing on one foot, and because Rubio is just a trump puppet – despite being appointed by the president and confirmed by the senate, that he no longer has the authority as Sec State – and that Some previously fired USAID director who must nbow be rehired must approve of everything the Sec State or president wishes to do – exactly how long do you think that lasts ?
The idiot judge completely undermines his own claims that Trump can not do something as president because congress did not give him the power to do so, when he turns arround and argues that – it can be done with the consent of someone NOT appointed by the president or confirmed by congress ?
You accuse Trump of exceeding his authority. So WHICH IS IT > Does the president have the executive power of the United states ? Does congress have it ? or is it vested in some unelected unconfirmed bureaucrat at USAID ?
There are 4yr olds with better legal reasoning skills than this.
Ordinary John Does who haven’t a clue about the law and constitution can read these orders and easily say – There is no way the law or constitution would say anything that crazy, and if it does – our founders Royal screwed the pooch, and why didn’t we spot this Fubar in the past 250 years ?
You engaged in massive lawfare to try to win the election – and you FAILED/
NOW you continue to engage in massive lawfare – only this time Trump’s legal bills are being paid by the US treasury and yours are out of pocket.
Worse it is obvious to most of the country that you learned nothing from the election. You are busy trying to thwart what people voted for.
Do you hate voters ? Do you hate yourselves ?
You have given Trump and Republicans the oportunity to go to war against biased federal judges – and you have provided the proof to the public of biased federal judges.
While this may be overturned quickly – I am not sure it is not to Republicans benefit to have this drawn out and to have lots of bad lower court decisions that have ordinary people wondering what the F#$K is wrong with our judiciary ?
How did we get so many biased morons as judges ?
And what can be done about it ?
All questions that benefit republicans.
The maxim always was that my right to swing my arm ends when the other person’s nose begins. At UIC, apparently the rule for faculty is that their First Amendment rights end when the most sensitive student’s hurt feelings begin.
“their First Amendment rights end when the most sensitive student’s hurt feelings begin.”
“…when the most sensitive student’s myopic, unintelligent, and inappropriate hurt feelings begin” – FIFY
Nothing like the Academic Minefield of Minority Hurt Feelings to enhance sensitivity (or is that STUPIDITY) of the elitist illuminati in our Judicial system! Once again, we have proof that Federal District Courts are populated with Low IQ Barely Able to Pass the Bar Lawyers Pretending to be Judges! These DEI Hire Judges must have retaken Constitutional Law class several times to get a C- grade! Thank you Democrats (because we know who these moron judges are) for confirming the lowest of the low to a lifetime appoint of overturned cases!
Can anyone else see the similarity of Iran surreptitiously sponsoring hamas, hezbollah and the houthis in order to achieve their ultimate end goal of a world wide caliphate and the likes of soros and others finding all manner of devious methods to continue their “fundamental transformation” of America.
Until we get to, and stop, the source of funds that keeps this animus going, we will not have peace in this nation (if that is possible with so many poisoned minds already in the milieu.
anyone else one see? NO! I don’t take mind altering drugs.
Perhaps you should, it could only help.
Junkie.
The Black Students Association’s complaint, as quoted above, is pretentious left wing tripe. It used to be that leftist pseudo-intellectuals used “enlightened” in every other sentence as a sure giveaway of their inability to think deeply. Now the light has gone out and it’s “culturally insensitive” and “tone deaf” instead. Really, can’t they come up with new terms once a decade so their tripe will at least be a little less boring?
jingoism matters!
Did Kilborn present a counterbalancing hypothetical that used the term pale ass peckerwood white mothahf$%kahs such that his white privilege didn’t completely govern his subject selection?
And Turls, why didn’t his disciplinary actions consist of fifty lashes from the whip as well as experiencing first hand the first moment of being lynched?
That’s what I wanna know. Party on, magats!!
I recall a passage from John Steinbeck’s book on King Arthur, or perhaps it was the wonderful Arthur Rex book by whoever, where one side in a battle taunted the other side by calling them vile sodomites. The tauntees were confused, but not enraged, because they actually were vile sodomites.
So Floyd agrees with the name calling and tries to pull Steinbeck in on it. Clearly he’s a Jim Crow type.
“pale ass peckerwood white mothahf$%kahs ” do not typically sue for hostile workplace and when they do they get laughed out of court.
Hypotheticals are NOT supposed to balance out greviances they are supposed to refect reality.
Expectedly, you miss the point entirely.
You have no point.
Why surprised? A LAW school acts unlawfully and its conduct is defended, at great expense, by a taxpayer-supported university administration. And that because an “association” of black LAW school students whined about words used on an exam!
Why is there even a “Black Law Students” group? When I was in school there was only the student body, not segregation and separation. Is there a White Law Students group? A Jewish Law Students group? A Men Law Students Group?
This is the left in a nutshell as they support Plessy v Ferguson and separate but equal. INSANE.
The law school here does indeed have a Jewish law students group, as well as BLSA etc. It is attached to a Catholic university, though.
I’m not
“. . . it did not serve any educational purpose.”
In a better world, the dean and the chancellor would’ve responded:
The purpose of an education is to prepare you for dealing with the real world — the world where, unfortunately, some do use such vile language. If you do not like the idea of being taught now how to deal with such situations as a professional attorney, perhaps you should seek a more suitable vocation. Like pounding sand.
Amen
This happened in 2020, the year the nation went nuts because the left was he** bent on ousting Trump from the WH. Riots in the streets (unpoliced and non-prosecuted, unlike J6) Covid lockdowns meant to ensure the economy would tank, rabid advancement of DEI, congressmembers kneeling with some type of African talismanic scarfs, professors and others washing the feet of minorities and a complete destruction of law and order.
We are still recovering from 2020 and the election of the corrupt and senile Joe Biden and the radical, very radical staff that ran his administration. The pendulum is swinging back to normalcy, under the umbrella of common sense, but it is a long road back.
@hullbobby
My thoughts too; my wife and I have discussed how 2024 was basically crawling from the wreckage of the willful destruction wrought on us since 2020.
We’ve turned a corner, and it will be a long road back. We have to expect the miscreants to shriek and flail with all of their might. I am not surprised we at all ee are back to paid ‘protestors’ causing violent havoc. But we are seeing victories for sanity as well; this piece is one, and support for the madness dwindles by the day.
Remember when college meant that you as a student would be pushed outside of your comfort zone and consider points of view outside of your perception of the world? Instead, the left will have you conform to their speech rules and never experience uncomfortable realities. Anyone who considers law as a career path will come across racial slurs and they will hear those very same words. Heck, I hear those words on the subway and my job has zero to do with the law.
It’s evident where the term snowflake comes from.
Too many thin-skinned students nowadays
With respect, I do not think these folks are “thin-skinned” or overly sensitive. They are hardened Leftists who see and will always take the opportunity to try and cause trouble and, hopefully for them, to get some rational normal (there are no conservatives left) professor or teacher fired and replaced with one of their own. They should be ignored.
What is amazing is the same people pushing this type of censorship with consequences, are the very same people filing briefs and making Judicial arguments that the free speech right of anti-semitism and violence against Jews in completely protected by the US Constitution. That same radical application of the Constition also extends to Non-citizen VISA holders………
@ bcofdt13 – I’m old enough to remember in 1957 Eisenhower sent troops to allow black students to enter a school and 1963 JFK did the same thing. Why haven’t the terrorist supporters at the many universities been handled in the same manner? No student white, black, Jew, Christian should be stopped from entering a school. If the school can’t guarantee the students safety and rights, shut the school down.
I know someone whose daughter (white) went to Little Rock Central High School in the early 2000’s. By that time it had degenerated into a jungle, with fights daily in the hallways. The school is about 70% black now, and while her daughter did get an education there, it was not a fun place. I looked up the stats just now, and they are 42% proficient in reading, and 33% proficient in math. But 90% graduate!
I have 2 relatives who quit teaching because they did not want to deal with the black students and all their youthful hijinks. One, was a liberal sort going into teaching, and much less liberal now after experiencing social justice first hand. She marched for George Floyd in 2020, and by 2023, after three years of teaching, had enough of it.
“youthful hijinks”?
More like continuous assault.
There are two components of our American Judiciary that needs significant improvements, in my opinion. The first is using the Grand Jury and the second the lower court of appeals. Both of these components have frequently been a waster of time and often cause more harm than good. The Grand Jury is a nonsense as it will indict nearly anything shown to them by any prosecutor, thus making the defendant tarnished before the case begins. Second, the lower Appeals Court seems to frequently consist of activists with very little regard to the constitution and give more weight to ideological confirmations rather than basing opinion on law. Justice John Roberts weighed in and revealed his biased hand (He never spoke out about packing the courts), now the entire judiciary is tainted. America may have the best legal system, but it is at this time in need of significant ehnhancements.
Why is it that members of a particular ethnic group or race can with impunity freely us the “n” and “b” words — obfuscating euphemisms as they are — while members of other races or ethnicities cannot? Why is that not a denial of the “equal protection of the laws” and freedom of speech guarantees of the Constitution?
Professors and assistant professors can be confident of only one thing: that their administration will sacrifice them to the woke demigods at the slightest provocation. That probably explains the really remarkable miniscule proportions of conservatives in Academia. It is not smart to expose yourself, not even in anonymous surveys.
(OT)
Congratulations to Musk and SpaceX for rescuing the STRANDED astronauts. And to Trump for greenlighting the rescue.
“Congratulations to Musk and SpaceX for rescuing the STRANDED astronauts. And to Trump for greenlighting the rescue.”
Absolutely agree. However, I think that sentiment is incomplete. DEI-happy, politically-connected parasite Boeing should be castigated for their gross incompetence in stranding those two astronauts for 278 days on what was to be a one week tour of the International Space Station. More particularly, Biden and his terrible administration must be roundly condemned for prolonging the ordeal of those astronauts by a factor of ~40 as a direct result of their decision, predicated on purely partisan political calculus, to not ask Musk and SpaceX for help.
re: ISS astronaut rescue by SpaceX – As I typed that comment, the old Gilligan’s Island TV show theme song began playing in my head (“Five passengers set sail that day
For a three hour tour, a three hour tour”). I’d bet that Squeaky Fromm could do something really cool turning the lyrics to that into a parody of Boeing’s and Biden’s failure, and Triump;s and SpaceX’s success. What about it, Squeaky ;-?
https://lyricsondemand.com/tvthemes/gilligansislandlyrics.html
Number 6 – Gilligan’s Island was another name for the Biden Administration. Except the Isle’s inhabitants had more ethics and were humorous also despite their hapless dealing with the vagaries of the sea and the Isle.
Hi, Number 6!!! You are in luck! I just finished typing up a divorce pleading, so I have an hour or two! I will try to do this for you. The Rhythm of it is easy, but, I will have to read up some on it! Get the facts and such.
Sen Kelly’s astronaut brother claimed on Fox that the stranded two could have come home at any time???? Well political hack, if they could have come home why didn’t they? He claimed, ridiculously, that the Space Station needed crew members and since they were there yada yada yada.
” Well political hack, if they could have come home why didn’t they?”
Didn’t Musk say to the Biden Administration he could bring them back sooner? Am I misinterpreting what you are saying?
“Didn’t Musk say to the Biden Administration he could bring them back sooner? Am I misinterpreting what you are saying?”
I’m pretty sure that what Scott Kelly said was intended to imply that the overstay of those astronauts was entirely voluntary, and was done solely in the interests of the mission. Which is 99% complete and utter BS. The fact is that Boeing stranded them there because of defective machinery, it exacerbated that issue with several examples of further incompetence, and Biden left them there because he didn’t want to take the political hit of allowing Musk (who was actively supported Trump by that time) to get credit for bringing them back.
https://ifunny.co/picture/planes-and-shit-dCdpaDk9B?s=cl
Kelley’s brother is correct – the could have come home at anytime.
Anytime Biden called up Musk and said – please bring them home.
There is a growing body of evidence that they were left there for nearly a year because the messaging of Musk bringing them back in an election year
Such cases are easy to understand. The professor does something technically within his rights. A political group attacks him for it. Chargers are made. Soon, the dean and college president must intervene. There are few jobs on campus more vulnerable than those two. Being feckless, they see termination of their vaulted positions if they don’t act against the professor, and they do and then hope and hope – for themselves. Thus, we have the distillation of hundreds of civil rights claims.
“the dean and college president must intervene. There are few jobs on campus more vulnerable than those two. Being feckless, they see termination of their vaulted positions if they don’t act against the professor, and they do and then hope and hope – for themselves.”
If your characterization is at all accurate, it might go a long way toward explaining how our colleges and universities became such virulent, anti-intellectual, cesspits.
As dearly beloved Rush Limbaugh used to say, ” Right On, Right On!”
I was taken aback by the language used by the students’ association. It was redolent of an indictment for witchcraft.
Quite niggardly of them in their application of example in their professors lesson.
Hey John. FOUR YEARS! Just what the corrupt Judges are trying to do. Tie up the Trump Administration in THE COURT and stop them from canceling
contracts that provide no benefit to taxpayers and
uncovering more criminal activity by their neo-FASCIST relatives and friends.
” Just what the corrupt Judges are trying to do. Tie up the Trump Administration in THE COURT and stop them from canceling
contracts that provide no benefit to taxpayers and
uncovering more criminal activity by their neo-FASCIST relatives and friends.”
You are wasting your time with that comment. Prof. Turley is on record on multiple occasions as vastly preferring the situation you describe to the prospect of impeaching judges who have clearly violated their oaths and duties.
I think that personal liberties should be fought for tooth and claw, even if some think that those liberties are a threat to social harmony. Screw your feelings and don’t overplay the “greater good” bu*****t on so many trivial issues or it won’t be a solid decision-making argument when it is actually relevant.
I was never a Newt Gingrich fan but desperate times require desperate measures and he makes a good point.
https://x.com/newtgingrich/status/1901235197271552490