3 ms·
Paywalled and I can’t really figure out what the article is about from the first two paragraphs. Can anyone summarize?
by kevinventullo 5y ago
Paywalled and I can’t really figure out what the article is about from the first two paragraphs. Can anyone summarize?
- CodesInChaos 5y agohttps://archive.ph/1O9nq https://archive.ph/1O9nq Black students stole from a bakery. Baker chased students, who were eventually arrested. This led to protests and accusations of racism against the bakery. University administrators (in particular the Dean of Students) actively took part and supported these, and advocated for the university to end its business relationship with the bakery. > The appellate judges held that while the trial court had properly found that “the student chants and verbal protests about the Gibsons being racists were protected by the First Amendment,” what separated Oberlin and placed it in a financial vise was the active, irresponsible and defamatory actions of several of its senior administrators. Rather than try to resolve the matter early on or use the resulting guilty pleas as a lesson, Oberlin actively sought to punish Gibson’s Bakery for having a different perspective, for standing by the arrest of the three Oberlin students, and for exercising its right of legal redress.
- spacemanmatt 5y agoI used to follow this case closely, but in hindsight, I believe the headline pretty much covers it. The school has to pay for defamation. The controversy I recall was about whether the school was involved, or just a professor or two, or just the student body. Now the facts are settled, I don't take much exception to the ruling.