Bacon's Rebellion

Democracy Thrives in Sunlight

Three Ideas for Protecting Civil Dialogue at UVa

—

by

James A. Bacon
in ,

by James A. Bacon

On Oct. 11, 2023, journalist Abigail Shrier engaged in a Q&A session at the University of Virginia discussing the transgender movement in the United States. Offended by her views, transgender militants and their allies sabotaged attendance of the event, abrogated an agreement with university authorities restricting where to hold their protest, crowded the entrance to the venue at Minor Hall, berated attendees entering the event, and harassed attendees leaving the event.

Responding to a letter from Jefferson Council President Tom Neale, the administration characterized some of the behavior as “disappointing,” but noted that there were “no arrests or injuries, and no property damage.” The administration found no grounds for follow-up action.

The Jefferson Council vigorously takes issue with the administration’s spin. We believe that protesters should be held to a higher standard than not causing injury or property damage. We have published a report detailing the events surrounding the Shrier event and offer three tangible recommendations for upholding the right of members of the UVa community to hear speakers free from disruption and intimidation.

These include:

  • Prohibit the practice of registration spam by members of the university community as a tactic for suppressing attendance at targeted events;
  • Set clear boundaries at designated protest areas to ensure separation from event attendees;
  • Issue No Trespass Orders for community members who engage in disruptive behavior on university grounds.

James A. Bacon is executive director of The Jefferson Council.

Share this article

ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)

ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)

Comments

50 responses to “Three Ideas for Protecting Civil Dialogue at UVa”

  1. Eric the half a troll Avatar
    Eric the half a troll

    “We want to ensure unchallengeable communication of our opinions by restricting the rights of others to voice their opinions.”

    1. Nathan Avatar
      Nathan

      Are you quoting yourself?

      Decency and order are not an infringement of anyone’s right to free speech.

      1. Eric the half a troll Avatar
        Eric the half a troll

        Actually with very few exceptions, they are…

        1. Nathan Avatar
          Nathan

          Oh, I forgot. Without violence and shutting down opposing views, campus leftists would be out of business.

          1. Eric the half a troll Avatar
            Eric the half a troll

            Violence or directly threatening violence is not protected but pretty much anything else is. Activists from both sides of the political spectrum push that envelope routinely.

          2. Nathan Avatar
            Nathan

            Freedom of speech on campus doesn’t require the taking over of buildings, blockades, or preventing opposing views from being disseminated or heard.

            Freedom to speak is not freedom to terrorize.

            “Activists from both sides of the political spectrum push that envelope routinely.”

            And when that happens, the result if often violence. The ideas presented were designed to maintain order and safety for all.

          3. Eric the half a troll Avatar
            Eric the half a troll

            Violence or the threat of it are not protected as I said above. The supposed preemptive avoidance of possible future violence is not a valid excuse to restrict rights. I will note that one of the rights being recommended by JC for elimination is that of free movement with absolutely no due process. Remember, JAB reports that “no arrests or injuries, and no property damage” occurred. I guess that is Conservatism for you these days…

          4. Nathan Avatar
            Nathan

            You are grasping, not at straws, but at nothing.

            Surely you read the headline. Maybe you should read it again.

            “Three Ideas for Protecting Civil Dialogue at UVa”

            An “idea” is not a fleshed out policy ready for implementation. These ideas can easily be accomplished fairly, in keeping with Students’ Rights and Responsibilities. If a student has previously been disciplined for disruptive behavior, that should impact their ability to do so in the future.

            STAF-003: Statement of Students’ Rights and Responsibilities

            Discipline – Students can expect discipline to be implemented through established procedures containing all elements of due process for the adjudication of charges and the opportunity for continued University involvement (as appropriate) until the resolution of the charges.

            https://uvapolicy.virginia.edu/policy/STAF-003

          5. Eric the half a troll Avatar
            Eric the half a troll

            JC is targeting the free movement of “community members” not simply students. Again with no accounting for due process.

          6. Nathan Avatar
            Nathan

            I guess these of the type of folks you would want at UVA events.

            https://twitter.com/yashar/status/1724968608244318521?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1724968608244318521%7Ctwgr%5E7a0cbbbb878167fe070f7f0ed8c3968653d3e272%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Ftwitchy.com%2Fdougp%2F2023%2F11%2F15%2Finsurrection-far-left-pro-palestine-protesters-clash-with-police-outside-dnc-hq-in-washington-dc-n2389855

          7. Lefty665 Avatar
            Lefty665

            Free speech does not have anything to do with speech you, I or anyone else likes. Quaintly there is a lot of speech I really don’t like that is protected.

          8. Nathan Avatar
            Nathan

            I wasn’t referencing what they said, but rather what they did. This isn’t speech.

            “…protestors grew violent, pepper spraying police officers and attempting to break into the building.”

            https://twitter.com/BradSherman/status/1724969356373737481?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1724969356373737481%7Ctwgr%5E10b5da3bc60efc11bcb3bdd3b0da4ae7cfe9fee6%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Ftwitchy.com%2Fdougp%2F2023%2F11%2F15%2Finsurrection-far-left-pro-palestine-protesters-clash-with-police-outside-dnc-hq-in-washington-dc-n2389855

          9. Eric the half a troll Avatar
            Eric the half a troll

            You see… that is actual assault… hence the arrests…. distinctly different from what JC is referring to… again “no arrests or injuries, and no property damage”…

        2. DJRippert Avatar
          DJRippert

          No, they are not. Police keep opposing protesters separate all the time. Blocking the entrance to a building can be prohibited without infringing on anybody’s right of free speech. Don’t believe me? Go to your local police department and block the entrance to the door of that building. See what happens.

          1. Eric the half a troll Avatar
            Eric the half a troll

            Will repeat what JAB reported: “no arrests or injuries, and no property damage.” Short of that, most everything is free speech protected. And no you can’t restrict access to a public building for some people and not others for no reason but a difference of opinion.

          2. James C. Sherlock Avatar
            James C. Sherlock

            “no arrests or injuries, and no property damage.” Short of that, most everything is free speech protected.”

            That is not an accurate description of the case law on free speech. But I did not expect one.

          3. Nathan Avatar
            Nathan

            Non violent civil disobedience is fine, if you are willing to suffer the consequences. But don’t do the crime if you aren’t prepared to do the time.

            Also, I’d like to know the nationalities of the foreign students at MIT who should have been suspended. I’m betting many wouldn’t dare to behave that way in their native country.

        3. James C. Sherlock Avatar
          James C. Sherlock

          Astonishing. I can’t make your point any better than you just did.

        4. WayneS Avatar
          WayneS

          A peripherally related question:
          Is intentionally ‘misgendering’ a transsexual an exercise of free speech?

          1. Eric the half a troll Avatar
            Eric the half a troll

            Yes, of course it is.

    2. Randy Huffman Avatar
      Randy Huffman

      Are you suggesting the JC’s recommendations restrict free speech? How?

      1. Eric the half a troll Avatar
        Eric the half a troll

        See Operation Rescue…

        1. James C. Sherlock Avatar
          James C. Sherlock

          “Operation Rescue”? Seriously Eric?

          You are in a constant loop. Just sign in and we will fill in the blanks for you.

          1. Eric the half a troll Avatar
            Eric the half a troll

            Operation Rescue has established the first amendment right to do exactly what the JC wish to restrict at UVa. I don’t have to agree with them to defend their rights. If my responses are predictable, it is because so are BR pieces these days. They have a distinct Groundhog Day flavor to them to be sure.

  2. beachguy Avatar
    beachguy

    The Jefferson Council’s recommendations seem perfectly reasonable.

    1. DJRippert Avatar
      DJRippert

      Of course they do. Because they are perfectly reasonable.

      1. Eric the half a troll Avatar
        Eric the half a troll

        No they are not.

        1. James C. Sherlock Avatar
          James C. Sherlock

          Isn’t that shovel getting a bit worn?

          1. Eric the half a troll Avatar
            Eric the half a troll

            Somebody has to clear away the stuff being slung around here… alas…

  3. James C. Sherlock Avatar
    James C. Sherlock

    The larger problem across the nation is that colleges and university “leaders” are really followers. They are terrified of their own faculties and students.

    They worry over every word of a statement – should it be a statement of concern? of alarm?

    A meeting is considered going nuclear. Consider Ryan’s meeting with the Iranian student in which she chewed him out and recorded the visit for radio broadcast.

    We note that MIT’s president, finding foreign students guilty of assaulting Jews, said she was going to suspend them. Then she changed her mind after considering they might get deported.

    She should simultaneously should have suspended them and notified Homeland Security to come and get them.

    Instead, anarchy.

    1. Nathan Avatar
      Nathan

      “She should simultaneously should have suspended them and notified Homeland Security to come and get them.”

      I regret that I have but one upvote.

      https://twitter.com/RetsefL/status/1722852140245254559?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1722852140245254559%7Ctwgr%5E0c97a4bb4e812aff6e397427081a17376f3ab3a5%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Ftwitchy.com%2Famy-curtis%2F2023%2F11%2F10%2Fmit-jewish-students-n2389636

    2. Eric the half a troll Avatar
      Eric the half a troll

      “We note that MIT’s president, finding foreign students guilty of assaulting Jews…”

      I don’t note any findings of “assault”. Can you provide a reference?

      1. DJRippert Avatar
        DJRippert

        From the letter referenced above …

        “Today, Jewish and Israeli MIT students were physically prevented from attending class by a hostile group of pro-Hamas and anti-Israel MIT students that call themselves the CAA.”

        The legal definition of assault is:

        An intentional act that gives another person reasonable fear that they’ll be physically harmed or offensively touched

        No physical contact or injury has to actually occur, but the accused person must have intentionally acted in a way to cause that fear

        Often defined as causing or attempting to cause injury to someone else

        In some circumstances can include threats or threatening behavior against others

        1. Eric the half a troll Avatar
          Eric the half a troll

          Generally, “assault” is defined as the threat or use of force on an individual that causes the individual to have reasonable apprehension of imminent harm.

          The situation cited in the letter is not a finding of assault nor a statement of the MIT President as Sherlock claims.

          1. James C. Sherlock Avatar
            James C. Sherlock

            “Generally” is a term used to buttress an argument without evidence. Thanks for your contribution.

          2. Eric the half a troll Avatar
            Eric the half a troll

            Speaking of evidence, I see you have no source for your claim… again…

          3. DJRippert Avatar
            DJRippert

            The source was in the letter I posted.

          4. Eric the half a troll Avatar
            Eric the half a troll

            Which is not a finding of either “assault” nor a finding of the MIT President. You understand?

      2. Nathan Avatar
        Nathan

        “The CAA hosted a blockade that not only disregards MIT guidelines, but also obstructs Jewish students from attending classes.”

        “Four hours after the blockade started, at 12 pm, the MIT administration passed a letter to all students, threatening their suspension if the crowds did not disperse from Lobby 7. Only the Jewish students left immediately.”

        “At 5 pm, all students on campus were warned through MIT’s emergency notification system to “avoid Lobby 7” –– officially recognizing the danger present to students as a result of this violent protest.”

        The fact that nobody was sent to the hospital, was because Jewish and other non violent students obeyed administration directives. That is no credit to the violent protesters.

        Suspensions were threatened, and should have been given. By failing to follow through, the administration now has lost its credibility, and the potential for future violence is enhanced.

        1. Eric the half a troll Avatar
          Eric the half a troll

          Still not the “MIT’s president, finding foreign students guilty of assaulting Jews…”

          1. James C. Sherlock Avatar
            James C. Sherlock

            Assault: Miriam Webster

            “a threat or attempt to inflict offensive physical contact or bodily harm on a person (as by lifting a fist in a threatening manner) that puts the person in immediate danger of or in apprehension of such harm or contact”

            You asked for details. Nathan gave them to you.

            You reject any information that does not buttress your oppressor/oppressed dogma.

            Keep digging. The hole is already way above your head.

          2. Eric the half a troll Avatar
            Eric the half a troll

            I see no claim of threat or perception of “immediate danger” nor do I see a “finding” by the MIT President of such as you claimed. Sorry but having a protest in a building lobby is never going to be “assault” unless there is actual assault involved. You, once again, overstepped in your zeal.

  4. Nancy Naive Avatar
    Nancy Naive

    Prohibit the practice of registration spam by members of the university community as a tactic for suppressing attendance at targeted events;

    Set clear boundaries at designated protest areas to ensure separation from event attendees; (aka “Free Speech Zones” usually located between the dumpsters behind the student center)

    Issue No Trespass Orders for community members who engage in disruptive behavior on university grounds.

    Forgot one! Here let me fix that!

    No snark. Well, exceptionally witty snark might be given special dispensation, but routine, run-of-the-mill snark will be deleted.

  5. f/k/a_tmtfairfax Avatar
    f/k/a_tmtfairfax

    Bring back “blacklisting” similar to what some large law firms have done with antisemitic law students. I suspect that most of these free speech preventors are white people from wealthy families. Excluding them from jobs with a path to financial success opens more of those jobs to people who don’t come from wealthy white families, which seems to be the goals of DEI folks. Kill two birds with one blacklist.

  6. Nancy Naive Avatar
    Nancy Naive

    Prohibit the practice of registration spam by members of the university community as a tactic for suppressing attendance at targeted events;

    Set clear boundaries at designated protest areas to ensure separation from event attendees; (aka “Free Speech Zones” usually located between the dumpsters behind the student center)

    Issue No Trespass Orders for community members who engage in disruptive behavior on university grounds.

    Forgot one! Here let me fix that!

    No snark. Well, exceptionally witty snark might be given special dispensation, but routine, run-of-the-mill snark will be deleted.

    1. James C. Sherlock Avatar
      James C. Sherlock

      Thanks.

      1. Nancy Naive Avatar
        Nancy Naive

        QED

  7. DJRippert Avatar
    DJRippert

    You want to know what restricting freedom of speech really looks like? It looks like this:

    https://reason.com/2023/08/02/uva-dean-of-students-purposefully-tampered-with-investigations-into-students-speech-lawsuit-claims/

    Even if Morgan Bettinger did say that the protesters in question would become speed bumps (which she almost certainly did not say) – how is that not an exercise of free speech?

    What right do the empty suited buffoons at UVa have to drag Ms. Bettinger through the wringer for supposed comments not even made on university property?

    I don’t believe there were any arrests, property damage or assaults in Ms. Bettinger’s case either.

    Apparently, at UVa, protected speech is only protected is you are saying something with which the administration agrees.

    Best of luck to Ms. Bettinger in her lawsuit against UVa. I hope she takes those lib-twits to the cleaners.

    1. Nathan Avatar
      Nathan

      And an example of actual oppression and potential genocide.

      EU condemns Darfur violence and warns of ‘another genocide’

      https://www.reuters.com/world/africa/eu-condemns-darfur-violence-warns-another-genocide-2023-11-12/

    2. Nathan Avatar
      Nathan

      And an example of actual oppression and potential genocide.

      EU condemns Darfur violence and warns of ‘another genocide’

      The European Union (EU) condemned on Sunday an escalation of violence in Sudan’s Darfur region, warning of the danger of “another genocide” after conflict there between 2003-2008 killed some 300,000 people and displaced more than 2 million.

      A war since April between Sudan’s regular army and Rapid Support Forces (RSF) paramilitary has destabilised the western region and reignited long-simmering feuds there.

      https://www.reuters.com/world/africa/eu-condemns-darfur-violence-warns-another-genocide-2023-11-12/

Leave a Reply

Read More