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

Oberlin College case shows how universities are losing their way

thehill.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 198 posts

Re: Oberlin College case shows how universities are losing their way

#111

Post by deogeo »

elicash wrote: post #106
deogeo wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Reading the article, several of the college faculty claimed the bakery's actions were racist, for which they had no evidence, and plenty of evidence against. "Students, professors and administrators held protests, charging that the bakery was racist and had profiled the three students." Literal comments or the flyer would be better, I agree, but it doesn't look like anyone is objecting to this description of the cont…

I don't think simply calling somebody "racist" should EVER be libel. Even when inaccurate. But hey, that's me and I'm a free speech supporter.

What about calling someone a pedophile? Should that also not be libel?

And before you claim it's different because being a pedophile is a crime - it's not a crime. Acting on it is. Just how being racist isn't a crime, but refusing to serve customers based on race is.

Re: Oberlin College case shows how universities are losing their way

#112

Post by bradleyjg »

elicash wrote: post #105
bradleyjg wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You cited NYT v Sullivan in several places in this thread. What facts lead to you weigh to come to the conclusion that the Gibsons are public figures? Maybe you have some intellectual humility and give deference to the judge and jury that heard all the facts rather than declaring them to be wrong based on a summary of a summary.

> public figures The college argued they were (limited purpose) public figures. The judge disagreed, clearly. I was making a point that to argue there are no First Amendment implications to libel laws is so far from established interpretations of the Constitution that it should give people who care about free expression pause. > based on a summary of a summary Are you disputing the summary? If so, which parts? I don'…

The case file is available for public inspection at Lorain County Clerk of Courts, 225 Court Street, First Floor, Elyria, OH 44035.

HTH

Re: Oberlin College case shows how universities are losing their way

#114

Post by rayiner »

elicash wrote: post #108
rayiner wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A university dean admitted to passing out a flyer that falsely stated that the Oberlin student had been assaulted: https://legalinsurrection.com/2019/05/gibsons-bakery-v-oberl... . A police officer testified that the Oberlin students had assaulted the bakery employee, not the other way around. The flyer also stated that the bakery had a long history of racial profiling. But at trial the dean admitted that she didn’t…

The assault (a crime!) claim on the flier is REALLY bad for the college. It makes me feel much better about the ruling, as much as I still disagree it's with a LOT less force now. (False accusations of racism or racial profiling, on the other hand, should absolutely be protected.) Edit: One thing I'd add. Even though our positions on this individual case are in opposition, we actually agree about the First Amendment…

What about false accusations of pedophilia? Why is one kind of falsehood protected and another not?

I think what you’re really concerned about is when people, in good faith, level an accusation of racism or racial profiling that turns out to be debatable or wrong. They shouldn’t be prosecuted. But that’s not what happened here. It’s not a high hurdle to show that an accusation of racism or racial profiling is not at least colorably true. Had the university done so, it likely would have gotten off the hook. They could have, for example, pointed to a suspicious pattern of calling the police. The university didn’t even try to do that.

I think the law is correct here. It’s one thing to protect expression made in good faith that turns out to be wrong. That’s important to avoid chilling effects. It’s another thing entirely to protect expression where there is not even a good faith basis to believe that the allegations are true.

Re: Oberlin College case shows how universities are losing their way

#115

Post by elicash »

adt2bt wrote: post #110
elicash wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thank you for being the first person to agree with my fundamental point that there are actual implications to the first amendment when it comes to libel laws. I'd love to hear any of the actual false statements ISSUED BY THE UNIVERSITY OR ITS STAFF. I relied on the so far uncontested statement of facts offered by OP. If those facts are wrong I'd be thrilled to revisit my position.

I love how this was quite literally just litigated yet you're here assuming the entire legal process for this case was a sham.

1. Legal process isn't necessarily over

2. I did not call it any of it a sham, let alone "the entire legal process." No need to make things up.

3. People should be encouraged to think for themselves!

Re: Oberlin College case shows how universities are losing their way

#116

Post by [deleted] »

rayiner wrote: post #114
elicash wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The assault (a crime!) claim on the flier is REALLY bad for the college. It makes me feel much better about the ruling, as much as I still disagree it's with a LOT less force now. (False accusations of racism or racial profiling, on the other hand, should absolutely be protected.) Edit: One thing I'd add. Even though our positions on this individual case are in opposition, we actually agree about the First Amendment…

What about false accusations of pedophilia? Why is one kind of falsehood protected and another not? I think what you’re really concerned about is when people, in good faith, level an accusation of racism or racial profiling that turns out to be debatable or wrong. They shouldn’t be prosecuted. But that’s not what happened here. It’s not a high hurdle to show that an accusation of racism or racial profiling is not at…

[deleted]

Re: Oberlin College case shows how universities are losing their way

#117

Post by hollerith »

elicash wrote: post #106
deogeo wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Reading the article, several of the college faculty claimed the bakery's actions were racist, for which they had no evidence, and plenty of evidence against. "Students, professors and administrators held protests, charging that the bakery was racist and had profiled the three students." Literal comments or the flyer would be better, I agree, but it doesn't look like anyone is objecting to this description of the cont…

I don't think simply calling somebody "racist" should EVER be libel. Even when inaccurate. But hey, that's me and I'm a free speech supporter.

>I don't think simply calling somebody "racist" should EVER be libel. Even when inaccurate.

Do you also believe that calling somebody a "serial sexual harrasser" should never be libel, even when inaccurate?

"Sexual predator"?

Re: Oberlin College case shows how universities are losing their way

#118

Post by elicash »

rayiner wrote: post #114
elicash wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The assault (a crime!) claim on the flier is REALLY bad for the college. It makes me feel much better about the ruling, as much as I still disagree it's with a LOT less force now. (False accusations of racism or racial profiling, on the other hand, should absolutely be protected.) Edit: One thing I'd add. Even though our positions on this individual case are in opposition, we actually agree about the First Amendment…

What about false accusations of pedophilia? Why is one kind of falsehood protected and another not? I think what you’re really concerned about is when people, in good faith, level an accusation of racism or racial profiling that turns out to be debatable or wrong. They shouldn’t be prosecuted. But that’s not what happened here. It’s not a high hurdle to show that an accusation of racism or racial profiling is not at…

I deleted my first reply because I think you're being disingenuous with this comparison. I think a better comparison is if I call someone a liar when speaking broadly about the person. Even if they have a documented history of telling the truth and I don't have a single lie, I think that's protected.

> It’s one thing to protect expression made in good faith that turns out to be wrong. That’s important to avoid chilling effects.

I agree with this strongly.

Edit: Also, I think, given you're a lawyer, you'd agree with me that a client of yours is on much safer ground when the thing they're accusing somebody of is about their general character rather than a crime. (Not that you'd have given your approval on the flyer with just that one claim struck out.)

Re: Oberlin College case shows how universities are losing their way

#119

Post by thatoneuser »

dang wrote: post #61
thatoneuser wrote: post #43

Good. There are far too many sitting comfortably in their ivory towers these days indoctrinating kids turning into adults as their personal army. There's too much hatred of certain races/genders (typically from what I see its white/men, but by no means are those two groups the only ones who are victims) that gets ignored. Many years ago (tho not that many) blacks would have their businesses routinely ransacked, prote…

The downvotes are more likely because of the fiery rhetoric in your comment. It's tedious, and there's far too much of it online. People come to HN to be interested, not blared at. Would you mind reviewing the site guidelines and using this site as intended from now on? https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Please enlighten me as to what about my post is rhetoric rather than describing a position and backing it up with facts from this very article. You keep saying I'm doing this yet I can't really see what I'm doing beyond assessing a social phenomenon. Can you be more direct than referring me to nebulous guidelines? Because to me it doesn't seem constructive at all.

Fwiw I see posts all over that have the same "fire" that my post does which are top posts. Doubly so for posts that are people just talking their opinions out. Usually around opinion pieces of tech. Is this only different because it involves race?

Re: Oberlin College case shows how universities are losing their way

#120

Post by deogeo »

elicash wrote: post #100
rayiner wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Defamation has long been deemed to be speech not protected by the first amendment. Because of the risk to freedom of expression, such claims have been limited in numerous ways, and are exceedingly difficult to win. But where a plaintiff does manage to overcome those hurdles, it is not an indicator of the fragility of the first amendment for the defamation claim to actually succeed. It’s simply applying well defined o…

Thank you for being the first person to agree with my fundamental point that there are actual implications to the first amendment when it comes to libel laws. I'd love to hear any of the actual false statements ISSUED BY THE UNIVERSITY OR ITS STAFF. I relied on the so far uncontested statement of facts offered by OP. If those facts are wrong I'd be thrilled to revisit my position.

> Thank you for being the first person to agree with my fundamental point that there are actual implications to the first amendment when it comes to libel laws.

He's not the first - the reason I didn't bring it up in my reply was that I agree with it. Libel (and true threats, and incitement to imminent lawless action) absolutely are limits on the first amendment and free speech. They're limits I, even as a free speech advocate/extremist, happen to agree with, but they are limits.

Post reply on HN