Is UC Berkeley Violating Student Rights in Handing Out Suspensions Over Protests?
A statement made by anonymous Boalt students takes a look at a number of disciplinary measures handed down by UCB to Andrea Miller - one of the protesters who was present when the Chancellor's house was attacked.
If Miller was engaged in non-violent protest then it's unacceptable for UCB to go after her (and from what I've read, it seems like they're systematically targeting the students who were at the Chancellor's house when it was attacked, regardless of whether or not the students can be shown to have participated in the attack). It's also worth noting that none of the students present are being criminally prosecuted for their alleged misconduct.
In the statement there's a focus on how Miller's rights have been violated by the UCB disciplinary process, which from my rudimentary understanding of the subject seems to be true, but the piece also uses a lot of empty phrases including "Stalinist procedure" and "Gestapo-like." The attack on the Chancellor's house was also downplayed heavily. I understand that the statement is intended to be read from a radical viewpoint, but there has to be some benefit in appealing to those of us who agree that the UCB acted poorly in response to the protests, but no better than to be taken in by needlessly inflammatory language.
A few more thoughts:
If Miller was engaged in non-violent protest then it's unacceptable for UCB to go after her (and from what I've read, it seems like they're systematically targeting the students who were at the Chancellor's house when it was attacked, regardless of whether or not the students can be shown to have participated in the attack). It's also worth noting that none of the students present are being criminally prosecuted for their alleged misconduct.
In the statement there's a focus on how Miller's rights have been violated by the UCB disciplinary process, which from my rudimentary understanding of the subject seems to be true, but the piece also uses a lot of empty phrases including "Stalinist procedure" and "Gestapo-like." The attack on the Chancellor's house was also downplayed heavily. I understand that the statement is intended to be read from a radical viewpoint, but there has to be some benefit in appealing to those of us who agree that the UCB acted poorly in response to the protests, but no better than to be taken in by needlessly inflammatory language.
A few more thoughts:
- The action against the student seems improper if the facts of this statement or true, but it'd be a stronger statement without the hyperbole and with some good cites backing up the legal positions.
- Who wrote it? Why are there no names attached?
- There's also another post on the site advocating violence as a means to an end when protesting, which is a position that some consider theoretically and ideologically sound, but often comes with consequences attached (like getting suspended from UCB).
Labels: Legal Issues, Only In Berkeley, Rabid Liberals
posted by James at 3:30 PM
12 Comments:
Well, it's nice to see students getting involved but it's pretty clear from the statement that they are still learning the law. For example, the assertion that student/university relationships "are contractual" pretty much destroys any due process argument. There are more effective ways to frame up the issue here, but we can't blame them for the students for their inexperience.
Nope. In California, the contractual relationship is a property interest. Similarly, 14th Amendment due process applies to public Universities. It's a little analogous to public employment, where the employer has to give a hearing before termination. Look at 2 cases, Goldberg v. Regents of UC and Andersen v. Regents of UC.
This comment has been removed by the author.
Berkeley Campus Student Code of Conduct (II.)C.)(2.)(c)(1): "Prior to any hearing the student and reporting party will provide Student Conduct and Community Standards with copies of all evidence, a list of possible witnesses, and any other information relevant to the incident to be shared at the hearing."
And Andersen v. Regents of Univ. of Cal. ... See More22 Cal. App. 3d 763, 772 (1972): Due process for students at public universities includes, "notice containing a statement of specific charges against him, the names of witnesses and a statement of the gist of their proposed testimony."
"1. The action against the student seems improper if the facts of this statement or true, but it'd be a stronger statement without the hyperbole and with some good cites backing up the legal positions."
This made me giggle. Write your own!
"2. Who wrote it? Why are there no names attached?"
Come on, do you talk shit on the 90% of posters here who post anonymously, me included? It sounds like it was written by Berkeley Law students, who want to remain anonymous?
"3. There's also another post on the site advocating violence as a means to an end when protesting, which is a position that some consider theoretically and ideologically sound, but often comes with consequences attached (like getting suspended from UCB)."
Great observation. So what?
9:46,
"'2. Who wrote it? Why are there no names attached?'
Come on, do you talk shit on the 90% of posters here who post anonymously, me included? It sounds like it was written by Berkeley Law students, who want to remain anonymous?"
Seems rather circular to answer "why" with "because."
I hope Ms. Miller is expelled from the school.
Alright, so the problem is that the photograph of this girl with the torch was not presented at the hearing? And that she was not forewarned of a witness to be called?
Is there a transcript of these proceeding or any sort of record publicly available? Or is it hidden due to privacy? Not that I do not trust the anonymous author, it would just be nice to have some of the information verified.
I don't really care enough about this to read the entire anonymous post, I feel very little sympathy for Miller. Even if she didn't actively participate, it is not a leap of the imagination to think she encouraged the people attacking the chancellor's house. At the very least, she was at the wrong place at the wrong time. Shit happens.
9:46, I did write my own. You just read it. :)
I do, generally, believe that online speech is better served when people attach their names to their statements. As someone who regularly does this, I fail to see the reasons to stay anonymous in the context of the statement.
I think the insensitivity to due process and the sentiment expressed that Miller is guilty simply for being at the scene are sad for a law school blog. Luckily, it's just anonymous trolling (for the most part).
Students may be accompanied by one advisor at any stage in the proceedings. An advisor’s role is to provide assistance in preparation and conducting meetings and hearings rather than speaking on the student’s behalf.
Current Threats to University of California Don’t Come From the Outside - $3 Million Extravagant Spending by UC President Yudof for University of California Berkeley Chancellor Birgeneau to Hire Consultants - When Work Can Be Done Internally & Impartially
During the days of the Great Recession, every dollar in higher education counts. Contact Chairwoman Budget Sub-committee on Education Finance Assemblywoman Carter 916.319.2062 - tell her to stop the $3,000,000 spending by Birgeneau on consultants.
Do the work internally at no additional costs with UCB Academic Senate Leadership (C. Kutz/F. Doyle), the world – class professional UCB faculty/ staff, & the UCB Chancellor’s bloated staff (G. Breslauer, N. Brostrom, F. Yeary, P. Hoffman, C. Holmes etc) & President Yudof.
President Yudof’s UCB Chancellor should do the high paid work he is paid for instead of hiring expensive East Coast consults to do the work of his job. ‘World class’ smart executives like Chancellor Birgeneau need to do the hard work analysis, and make the tough-minded difficult, decisions to identify inefficiencies.
Where do the $3,000,000 consultants get their recommendations?
From interviewing the UCB senior management that hired them and approves their monthly consultant fees and expense reports. Remember the nationally known auditing firm who said the right things and submitted recommendations that senior management wanted to hear and fooled the public, state, federal agencies?
$3 million impartial consultants never bite the hands (Chancellor Birgeneau/ Chancellor Yeary) that feed them!
Mr. Birgeneau's accountabilities include "inspiring innovation, leading change." Instead of deploying his leadership and setting a good example by doing the work of his Chancellor’s job, Birgeneau outsourced his work to the $3,000,000 consultants. Doesn't he engage UC and UC Berkeley people at all levels to examine inefficiencies and recommend $150 million of trims? Hasn't he talked to Cornell and the University of North Carolina - which also hired the consultants -- about best practices and recommendations that eliminate inefficiencies?
No wonder the faculty, staff, students, Senate & Assembly are angry and suspicious.
In today’s Great Recession three million dollars is a irresponsible price to pay when a knowledgeable ‘world-class’ UCB Chancellor and his bloated staff do not do the work of their jobs.
Pick up the phone and call: save $3 million for students!
Post a Comment
<< Home