41–50 of 484 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You don't need a "voting rights professor" to tell you what they're doing in Florida is undemocratic, un-American and 100% politically motivated.
I don't mean to nitpick, but calling this un-American strikes me as the No True Scotsman fallacy. I.e., Florida is part of the U.S. So if Florida does it, in at least a small way it is American.
The real conflict of interest here is politicians spending your money for their political goals.
I have a colleague who does environmental litigation. (Think Erin Brockovich.) They have a big civil case against a large energy company in a southern, “energy-friendly” state. They had an expert witness all lined up - a professor at the (public!) state university. Well this expert happened to be up for tenure and was (allegedly) told in no uncertain terms that, should they testify as an expert witness in this case,…
As a professor, I think the actions of The University of Florida are abhorrent. I would never want to work in an environment that kowtows to politics. There are enough political considerations within a University, but having to deal with state politics as well? Count me out. At the same time, he doesn’t have tenure? So they are actually fully within their rights to do this, and really no one should be surprised. But…
I have a colleague who does environmental litigation. (Think Erin Brockovich.) They have a big civil case against a large energy company in a southern, “energy-friendly” state. They had an expert witness all lined up - a professor at the (public!) state university. Well this expert happened to be up for tenure and was (allegedly) told in no uncertain terms that, should they testify as an expert witness in this case,…
This seems like clear "witness intimidation" aka "Tampering with a witness, victim, or an informant" https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1512 (b)Whoever knowingly uses intimidation, threatens, or corruptly persuades another person, or attempts to do so, or engages in misleading conduct toward another person, with intent to— (1)influence, delay, or prevent the testimony of any person in an official proceeding;…
I have a colleague who does environmental litigation. (Think Erin Brockovich.) They have a big civil case against a large energy company in a southern, “energy-friendly” state. They had an expert witness all lined up - a professor at the (public!) state university. Well this expert happened to be up for tenure and was (allegedly) told in no uncertain terms that, should they testify as an expert witness in this case,…
As a professor, I think the actions of The University of Florida are abhorrent. I would never want to work in an environment that kowtows to politics. There are enough political considerations within a University, but having to deal with state politics as well? Count me out. At the same time, he doesn’t have tenure? So they are actually fully within their rights to do this, and really no one should be surprised. But…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You don't need a "voting rights professor" to tell you what they're doing in Florida is undemocratic, un-American and 100% politically motivated.
As a curious non-Floridian, what about the bill is objectionable? I think I found the text here: https://www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2021/90/BillText/er/HT... I personally find issue with the idea of convicts being unilaterally disbarred from voting while I also feel that verifying the identification of the voter is pretty crucial to a believable vote. But I didn't read the whole thing. There might be more objectio…
this doesn't sound like a big deal. UF is saying that professors cannot both receive compensation for your testimony and testify as a member of the university. in other words, they can testify for free, or they cannot use their the fact that they're UF professors as part of their credentials without prior approval, or do anything that's a "conflict of interest" as defined by UF themselves. the article itself admits t…
No, you left out the only important part here - that the testimony is considered “adverse to the university’s interests.”
> in other words, they can testify for free
No, they were denied permission to testify. They are not allowed to accept the job pro bono, where did you get that idea?
Most countries, including EU nations, ban mail-in voting minus exceptions like living abroad, these laws being passed because of discovered fraud in elections. Election integrity is the difference between democracy and a one-party state. Every citizen should be bending over backwards to make sure our elections dont have sources of fraud.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't mean to nitpick, but calling this un-American strikes me as the No True Scotsman fallacy. I.e., Florida is part of the U.S. So if Florida does it, in at least a small way it is American.
By that logic, anything going on in Columbia is equally American.
I have a colleague who does environmental litigation. (Think Erin Brockovich.) They have a big civil case against a large energy company in a southern, “energy-friendly” state. They had an expert witness all lined up - a professor at the (public!) state university. Well this expert happened to be up for tenure and was (allegedly) told in no uncertain terms that, should they testify as an expert witness in this case,…
Agree. With all the anti-democratic practices being rolled out across the states it’s pretty scary to imagine things even a year from now and a long time forward. Life threats against election officials and all the way up to Senators. Gerrymandering. Even the SCOTUS is biased. Seems civics in the US are about to be rigged for one party rule.