Despite recent reports raising questions over whether Covid-19 originated in a the Wuhan virology lab and Dr. Fauci admitting that the leak theory was possible (and worth investigating), the science and health reporter for the New York Times declared yesterday that the theory was “racist.” Even Facebook has announced that it is willing to allow users to discuss the theory and underlying evidence. When the tweets triggered an outcry, Apoorva Mandavilli deleted the tweets and, when asked by a Fox reporter for a comment, added “please don’t write” about her controversy.
We recently discussed the controversy at Rutgers Law School over the reading of the “n-word” from a state supreme court opinion. Now there is a potentially serious conflict brewing over the right of the student government to demand that all student groups hold at least one event featuring critical race theory or diversity issues. The requirement (for any group receiving more than $250) presents some interesting questions in the conflict between free speech and diversity programs at such schools. Continue reading “Rutgers Law Students Require All Student Groups To Hold Critical Race Theory Or Diversity Programs”
There is an interesting decision out of the European Court of Human Rights. The court fined an Italian court for “playing down gender-based violence” in a ruling on a gang rape case. The ECHR objected to references to the alleged victim’s sexuality, behavior, and the color of her underwear. Continue reading “Italian Court Fined For “Playing Down Gender-Based Violence””
Read that headline a couple times. There was a time when such a headline would only appear on The Onion, but it is true. Facebook has long banned anyone who discussed the evidence that a worldwide pandemic killing millions and destroying the global economy may have been released from a government lab in Wuhan, China. Facebook would not allow the theory to be discussed as “debunked” despite widespread criticism that Facebook was, again, engaging in corporate censorship. The false claim that this theory was “debunked” was pushed by various media platforms as part of the criticism of then President Donald Trump and his Administration. Now however Dr. Anthony Fauci and others have acknowledged that there is a basis to suspect the lab as the origin of the outbreak. So now Facebook will allow you to talk about it. Continue reading “Facebook: People Will Now Be Allowed To Discuss Whether Covid-19 Originated In Wuhan Lab”
Below is my column in The Hill newspaper on the statement of Dr. Anthony Fauci and others that the origin of Covid-19 could well have been the virology lab in Wuhan, China. The increasing recognition of that theory could make a recent lawsuit against former President Donald Trump more of an opportunity than a liability. Indeed, Trump’s counsel may secretly want the flawed complaint by the Chinese American Civil Rights Coalition to survive standing and other threshold challenges in order to secure a ruling on the use of terms like the “China flu.”
Here is the column:
Continue reading “Dr. Fauci Emerges As An Unlikely Witness For Trump In The “China Flu” Case”
Last year, we discussed the controversy over the acting Northwestern Law Dean declaring publicly to “I am James Speta and I am a racist.” He was followed by Emily Mullin, executive director of major gifts, who announced, “I am a racist and a gatekeeper of white supremacy. I will work to be better.” The public confessions reflect the view that all white people are racist due to their race and privilege — a view contested by some as itself a form of racial intolerance or bias. Now one of Brandeis’ Assistant Deans, Kate Slater, has triggered a similar controversy after declaring “all white people are racists.” Slater is the Assistant Dean of Student Affairs in the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences.Continue reading “Brandeis Dean Declares “Yes, All White People Are Racists””
The long-awaited, though partial, release of a memorandum from the Justice Department this week left many “frustrated,” as predicted by the Washington Post, in Washington. The reason is what it did not contain. Critics had sought the memo as the “smoking gun” to show how former Attorney General Bill Barr scuttled any obstruction charges against Donald Trump. Instead, the memo showed the opposite. The staff of the OLC actually found that the allegations did not meet the standard of obstruction even without any defenses or privileges related to Trump’s office. Continue reading “Newly Released OLC Memo Shows Staff Lawyers Found No Basis For Obstruction Charges In Mueller Report”
We often discuss how defending free speech often means defending those who we find thoroughly grotesque or offensive. In that sense, Nicholas Brock, 52, is the ultimate personification of the price we pay for free speech. The neo-Nazi was given a four-year sentence for what the court called his “toxic ideology” based on the contents of the home he shared with his mother in Maidenhead, Berkshire. In my view, the only thing more troubling than Brock’s hateful views is the decision to criminalize the holding of such views. It is an example of the continued erosion of bright-line protections of free speech in the United Kingdom and other European countries. Judge Peter Lodder QC declared “I do not sentence you for your political views, but the extremity of those views informs the assessment of dangerousness.” That is a fine distinction that allows for sweeping criminalization of political viewpoints.
Continue reading ““Toxic Ideology”: English Neo-Nazi Given Four Years For His Extremist Views”
We previously discussed how prosecutors in North Carolina, Georgia, Oregon, and other states have dismissed or downgraded many rioting cases, including cases of individuals who destroyed statues in broad daylight. Now, New Mexico District Attorney Mary Carmack-Altwies has announced that all of the individuals who destroyed a 152-year-old obelisk last October will be given “restorative justice” and no jail time. They will however be required to write a letter about their actions. Carmack-Altwies called the premeditated act of destruction of the obelisk a mere “political problem that got forced upon the criminal justice system.”
I am admittedly a long advocate for protecting wolf populations as well as other wildlife severely displaced or reduced by development or hunting. However, there now appears a type of environmental dividend for those looking for a reason to support wolf reintroduction programs: lower accidents and insurance rates. A new study published in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences found that car accidents with deer decreased dramatically after the re-introduction of wolves. Continue reading “Want Lower Car Insurance? Get Some Wolves, According to a Recent Study”
There is an interesting case out of Kansas where an alleged rape victim has used a 134-year-old law to seek her own grand jury after prosecutors reached a plea bargain with the alleged attacker. Madison Smith, 22, had to gather hundreds of signatures to impanel a “citizen grand jury” under Kansas law in a case that could face significant evidentiary and constitutional challenges. Continue reading “Former Bethany College Student Impanels Her Own “Citizen Grand Jury” After Prosecutors Decline Rape Case”
We have been discussing the state laws requiring contractors and employees to swear that they do not support the Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions (“BDS”) movement against Israel. I have long maintained that the law is unconstitutional as a limitation of free speech and associational rights. This week, a court in Georgia became the latest to declare such laws unconstitutional. The case was brought by journalist Abby Martin who was denied a contract as a keynote speaker at Georgia Southern University due to her support of the BDS movement. The opposition to these laws is not driven by the merits of the BDS movement or its opposition. Rather, the issue is the curtailment of political speech, including compelling official speech or viewpoints, as a condition for state employment.
Continue reading “Federal Court Rules In Favor Of Journalist Contesting Georgia’s Anti-BDS Law”
Below is my column in The Hill on the recent decision of a federal judge that the Biden Administration was engaged in racial and gender discrimination in the administration of the pandemic relief under the American Rescue Plan Act. It is a question that is now being raised in a variety of federal programs under the Biden Administration. Continue reading “Preference or Prejudice? Federal Court Finds Biden Administration Is Engaged In Racial and Gender Discrimination”
Columbia Professor Jeffrey Lax is under fire on conservative sites like the The College Fix for attacking Baruch College student Gabriel Montalvo for defending former President Donald Trump on Facebook. Lax appears entirely unhinged in the exchange and lashes out at Montalvo who at the time was a student at Queensborough Community College. To his credit, Montalvo did not call for Lax’s termination — as is often the case in college protests for those holding opposing views. However, he did call for Columbia to investigate Lax. I believe that such an investigation would also be an abuse despite viewing Lax’s postings as juvenile, hysterical, and unworthy of a professor. As will come as no surprise to many, I viewed the postings as exercises of free speech that should be protected by all academic institutions. Continue reading ““Neo-Nazi Murderer Lover”: Columbia Professor Under Fire After Attacking A Baruch Student On Social Media For Defending Trump” 
A new lawsuit by the Chinese American Civil Rights Coalition has garnered national attention in the media where former President Donald Trump is being sued for his use of such terms as the “Chinese Virus,” “China Virus,” “Wuhan Flu,” and “Kung Flu.” What is most interesting about this lawsuit is how it is arguably meritless under both tort and constitutional law. However, there has been little pushback from a host of lawyers who have spent months calling for sanctions against Republican lawyers for filing lawsuits viewed legally or factually meritless. This lawsuit seems designed to amplify a public relations campaign without substantial legal support. The question is whether it states just enough to avoid sanctions and whether the Trump team wants to seek such sanctions under Rule 11. Trump is being sued in his official and personal capacities.