Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

University of Florida bars professors from testifying in a voting rights case

npr.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

341–350 of 484 posts

Re: University of Florida bars professors from testifying in a voting rights case

#341

Post by treebot »

cmh89 wrote: post #309
andrew_ wrote: post #277

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've lived in Michigan, Georgia, Florida, and Texas and (again, as a minority) have never experienced any of these. I'll admit that confirmation bias is a real thing and may apply here, however these points smell of common media talking points and heavy, heavy tribalism. Even as a registered Democrat, I just do not buy into the "Democrats are purveyors of voting righteousness and the Republicans are out to destroy ou…

That's great for you! That doesn't really have any bearing on the documented reality of republican disenfranchisement of voters. Sometimes 'common media talking points' are talking points because a real and serious problem exists. There's plenty of evidence of the problem if you want to take the time to get educated on it. republicans ARE out to destroy the right to vote. They are actively anti-democracy to the point…

> republicans represent a minority of Americans. They'd never have power again if we had fair democratic elections. Democrats represent the majority of Americans. They benefit greatly from fair democratic elections. It's just that simple.

This is the truth, and is why Republicans are doing what they are doing. It's not because Republicans are bad and Democrats are good. It's because Republicans are going to lose otherwise.

Re: University of Florida bars professors from testifying in a voting rights case

#342

Post by Retric »

UnpossibleJim wrote: post #324
mcguire wrote: post #275

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We like to think of it as democracy in action.

So the Salem witch trials were "democracy in action"?

Yep. Democracy isn’t perfect it’s just one compromise among many.

Re: University of Florida bars professors from testifying in a voting rights case

#343

Post by dahart »

davidrupp wrote: post #257
dahart wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> UF is saying that professors cannot both receive compensation for your testimony and testify as a member of the university 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?

https://www.gainesville.com/story/news/education/campus/2021... "Hessy Fernandez, UF director of issues management and crisis communications, told the Gainesville Sun in a text message Sunday the university views the professors' request to do outside work for the plaintiffs in the lawsuit as harmful to the university's interests. "However, to be clear," she stated, "if the professors wish to do so pro bono on their o…

I’m happy to be wrong about this, thank you for the link. It’s new information from the top linked article that pro bono would be allowed. I would speculate there’s maybe a big enough caveat in there that the university knows makes a pro-bono arrangement unworkable while appearing to be flexible. “On their own time without using university resources” could mean it’s not actually possible, and doing it pro bono obviously doesn’t change how the university feels about the case and it’s potential harm to their interests. But if the university really means it and would allow the testimony without repercussions, then the situation isn’t as bad as it seemed.

Re: University of Florida bars professors from testifying in a voting rights case

#344

Post by jablongo »

zackmorris wrote: post #172

Probably what's going on is that someone on the board of trusties gets money from the political establishment in Florida and is worried that they'll lose it if the voting barriers are fixed and different leadership is elected. This has similarities with the shenanigans pulled by Sinema and Manchin around the Build Back Better plan. Political horse trading to advance the agendas of special interests, at great expense…

This project is similar to what you are describing, but data is lacking at the local level https://www.followthemoney.org/

Re: University of Florida bars professors from testifying in a voting rights case

#345

Post by kodah »

baldeagle wrote: post #325
xenophonf wrote: post #241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In practice, it means establishing non-partisan redistricting commissions, taking that power away from the legislature or the political parties: https://www.nonprofitvote.org/nonpartisan-redistricting-citi...

This is a good response. I think California already does things like this, by having a non-partisan redistricting process. Texas, on the other hand, could barely more embrace parternship.

I doubt California does this well. My experience in California is that if you look at voting trends you'd think areas like SF are deeply blue, probably borderline far left. If you come out here though, it's really not that way. Then again, a comparison like the one you gave is bound to fail even the smallest smell test.

The outcome is similar in that votes don't really reflect what the population wants, but for different reasons.

Re: University of Florida bars professors from testifying in a voting rights case

#346

Post by isoskeles »

notreallyserio wrote: post #333
isoskeles wrote: post #233

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thank you for scare quotes around something I never said. What will you accuse me of next? I don't think any of this is "worth it," I just don't agree with coming up with sob stories as a counterexample. It's not that hard to hold onto important government documents like your birth certificate, social security card, etc. The argument against disenfranchisement shouldn't look like such a clear edge case. If anything,…

It’s also really easy for someone to steal your documents. It’s not unheard of for an abusive partner to steal documents in order to trap their victim. I know your pattern now, you’ll call this another edge case sob story and set it aside because it isn’t convenient for your argument. As for your paper document argument… what is your proposed alternative? You must have one, else you wouldn’t have floated it.

Appreciative to see we've all moved on from, 'voter id is inherently racist,' to, 'what if my dog ate my voter id?'

(Aside, today is having fun with quotes day.)

Re: University of Florida bars professors from testifying in a voting rights case

#347

Post by WarOnPrivacy »

Consultant32452 wrote: post #321
chuckee wrote: post #294

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I couldn't find this information in the NPR article - do you have a different source?

This is from the article: >"It is important to note that the university did not deny the First Amendment rights or academic freedom of professors Dan Smith, Michael McDonald and Sharon Austin," the school said in an email to NPR. "Rather, the university denied requests of these full-time employees to undertake outside paid work that is adverse to the university's interests as a state of Florida institution." The oper…

> The operative phrase there is "outside paid work."

> you interpreted NPR's article exactly the way NPR intended you to interpret it.

This take seems born out of bias, one that comes with prebuilt animosity toward NPR while assuming the university admin's stated reason is the sole and actual reason for denying testimony.

It's notable that the university could defuse the situation by clarifying what are acceptable avenues for the professors to testify - and then doesn't do that.

Re: University of Florida bars professors from testifying in a voting rights case

#348

Post by bryanrasmussen »

mullen wrote: post #291
brazzledazzle wrote: post #282

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I find it fascinating that the supreme court has upheld the ability to forgo so many purportedly inalienable rights via contract.

Well, you did voluntary signed a Contract. As part of a commercial exchange, you agree to do and do not certain things for money. Inalienable Rights can't be signed away, so the argument that you are signing away Inalienable Rights really does not hold water.

I agree but I believe the Supreme Court does not, which would imply to me that they do not believe any right that can be signed away is inalienable - although I also expect they would never say this outright.

Re: University of Florida bars professors from testifying in a voting rights case

#349

Post by nickff »

ClumsyPilot wrote: post #270

"Three University of Florida professors were denied permission from the school to testify in a major voting rights case " What the fuck is 'permission to testify'? I thought access to justice was a constitutional right. If you can't get anyone to tesrify, then you have no access to justice. We have surrendered so many rights in various contracts, we hardly have any freedoms left.

The professors were looking to make money by testifying against the interests of their employer's parent organization:

>"the university denied requests of these full-time employees to undertake outside paid work that is adverse to the university's interests as a state of Florida institution."

This seems reasonable to me; if they want to testify to express themselves, they can still do it pro-bono, otherwise, they should probably seek non-government employment.

Re: University of Florida bars professors from testifying in a voting rights case

#350

Post by angelzen »

ceejayoz wrote: post #338
angelzen wrote: post #332

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I could not find the Congressional vote totals on the Wikipedia page. If you have a source with the Congressional vote totals, please share. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_United_States_presidentia...

Congressional: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_United_States_House_of_Re...

Thanks for the link. The congress vote went 66-34. The congressional delegation, 79-21. There is a noticeable gap there.

Perhaps this is a moment to step back, and at the very least analyze the full data set? How much being in charge of the State Legislature gives room for gerrymandering promoting candidates from the same party? Is it really a one side issue, or both parties engage in it with abandon whenever they get the chance?

Well, that was a deeper foray in US politics than I ever wanted. Hastalavista!

Post reply on HN