Exactly, its a basic due process analysis 101 (which technically only applies to the government, but the logic is still illustrative here). The amount of process that is “due” depends on the rights at stake. Criminal cases can impose jail time thus more process is due. Expulsion is the worst possible punishment a…

This is concern trolling at its finest. There’s no reason why there can’t exist two separate adjudications for a sexual assault charge. One for the school to impose its own internal punishment and one for potential criminal sanctions. Part of the reason for this is that schools often have their own interpretations of…

Many schools have pretty severe honesty codes that would cover the rare occasions when people make completely false accusations of sexual assault. But even if they don’t, colleges and universities ultimately have the right to determine what constitutes misconduct severe enough to warrant expulsion. It’s ridiculous to…

Whether or not you get expelled from a university is a university matter and should be handled within the university system. Regardless of what the infraction is. If a school could punish a student by imposing criminal sanctions like jail time, that would be a huge problem, but they have every right to determine who…

I’m really sick of these people whining about how sexual assault cases should be handled by the police and not the colleges themselves. I could see a problem if the colleges were like sentencing people to prison, but when the punishment is expulsion, that is totally something within their purview. At most colleges,…

Fine, but that is a separate issue from whether or not a university can expel you after they find whether or not you violated their code of conduct based on your behavior. Just because there is also a criminal component to the act doesn’t mean the university can’t determine whether or not to expel an alleged…

Thank you! Colleges have all sorts of conduct code reasons why they can expel you, and I bet a lot of them involve far less due process than sexual assault violations.

Exactly. There’s no constitutional right to attend college (not to say that that wouldn’t be a good thing, but its not the case right now). Even the public universities are private enough in the sense that they can determine who can and who cannot attend. So yes, they are allowed to impose whatever the hell standards…

Unless North Dakota has a weird trespass law that’s absolutely incorrect. In most states the definition of trespass is the act of knowingly entering someone else’s property without their permission. Whether or not the property owner asks you to leave is irrelevant.

If only the Dakota Access Project would also follow the law in its treatment of native/native-adjacent lands as well. There is plenty of legal precedent that recognizes that even if land isn’t technically part of a reservation, it still may be subject to laws concerning Native American sovereignty.

Also, her statement was explicitly about how #notallTrumpsupporters fit into the so-called “basket of deplorables” and if we pretend like they do we are going to have zero chance to convince them not to vote for him.

Yeah and also that’s where she shines from a campaigning standpoint. The local press actually cares about the specific local issues, and Clinton is really good at driving deep down into them in order to understand them and give the press a solid well-informed answer.

I really hope she does more of these. Sure, they are annoying and grueling, but she’s not terrible at them, and if nothing else, it gives her practice at talking about the non-issues and made up scandals that are always brought up when she is in a debate/interview.

Not to mention, lupus can attack your nervous system and brain. It’s currently happening to one of my sister’s best friends and its a horrible thing...

Well it may have been good for criminal stuff (honestly I have been practicing law for almost 3 years and still most of what I know about criminal law comes from SVU), but it has nothing to do with corporate law lol.

A partner would not necessarily know. I worked and work at a firm that is similar in size and structure to her husband’s firm. At my last firm, partners in my group of 50 attorneys out of 700+ wouldn’t even necessarily know what the other partners in the group were doing at any given time. It’s not a huge stretch to…

It’s none of those things...

Not really. It’s rare for “Big Law” firms like Proskauer (where her husband works) to have any clients that would make or break them. They represent so many different clients in so many different capacities, that there just isn’t a significant enough pull from any one client at these places that would create the…

Why would they put pressure on him? They weren’t representing Sony in that particular case, and its not like Sony was going to be like oh shit you can’t represent us now because you guys didn’t manipulate the outcome of this case. There’s almost nothing they could gain by manipulating the outcome of this case and if…

Because its really hard to see how Sony winning or losing this case would affect him either way and to the extent it did, the impact would be way to small for anyone to be willing to manipulate the outcome of the case. These rules aren’t hard and fast, and they are fact-determinant there has to be a more direct…