5 ms·

It’s also crazy (read: unconstitutional) to punish students who do have everything to do with these protests.

emsign 1y ago
This is exactly how division works. Threaten all and they turn on each other. "Why me? I'm not the one you want! Take them!" It's not so much about the Gaza protests, that's just another occassion to normalize division and mistrust within all parts of society.
gosub100 1y ago
[flagged]
- sorcerer-mar 1y ago
  Private schools can create and enforce their own rules how they wish. The United States government is forbidden from creating or enforcing rules on content of speech. It's actually only a 1st Amendment question in one case and not the other. Looks like they tricked ya though! (Technically it's a 1st Amendment question in both cases in that private entities have a 1st Amendment right to create rules for their own campuses)
  - ty6853 1y ago
    In regards to protest though, the activity they are interested in, that is a right of 'the people to peaceably assemble' per 1A. Non-immigrants are not 'the people' per current interpretation of the constitution. If they were people, they would have all the rights ascribed to 'the people' including right to bear arms. Non immigrants do not have a right to bear arms, thus it cannot logically follow they are [the] people.
    - bigyabai 1y ago
      [flagged]
      - ty6853 1y ago
        You can read here, but in short 'the people' are those who are members of the 'political community' according to certain criteria. Generally this doesn't include non-immigrants. https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.ca5.214190/gov.uscourts.ca5.214190.103.1.pdf https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.ca5.214...
    - sorcerer-mar 1y ago
      > immigrants are not 'the people' per current interpretation of the constitution. Not true. The meaning of "the people" is interpreted differently from Amendment to Amendment. In the 1st and 5th Amendments, it has historically been interpreted to include non-citizens (even illegal ones!) while in the 2nd Amendment it has been interpreted much more narrowly. And regardless, this in no way authorizes the government to compel Harvard to do anything. Even in the most fascist interpretation you can dream up, it would mean the government itself is allowed to curtail their assembly. Harvard has no obligations (under the 1st Amendment!) to do any such thing.
      - ty6853 1y ago
        I'm not sure anyone can take seriously the proposition that 'the people' is Jekyll and Hyded amendment by amendment, especially when the constitution is completely devoid of any suggestion it is interpreted as such.
        sorcerer-mar 1y ago
        That's a huge bummer because that is very clearly and unequivocally what the case law shows.
        ty6853 1y ago
        Constitution is the supreme law. The constitution does not make an amendment by amendment distinction what 'the people' is.
        sorcerer-mar 1y ago
        Ah... I see we're dealing with a much more fundamental misunderstanding than I thought! Are you American/did you attend American middle or high schools?
        ty6853 1y ago
        >he meaning of "the people" is interpreted differently from Amendment to Amendment. In the 1st and 5th Amendments, I went to the one where they didn't teach 'the people' was written anywhere in the 5th amendment. I'm definitely not being interested in being lectured by those who think imaginary words exist in the 5th amendment.
  - gosub100 1y ago
    And private schools can suffer the consequences of oppressing certain groups.
    - sorcerer-mar 1y ago
      They sure can! You can choose not to attend them. You can go stand on public property and yell at them. Under the US Constitution, "the consequences" are absolutely not allowed to include weaponization of the State through coercion, punishment, or threat to control what the public thinks. Fascist goobers skipping out on their "Basics of Being an American" course lmao
      - gosub100 1y ago
        And I can vote for Trump who will cast shame and doubt on their reputation and damage them as far as his authority allows. I have no sympathy for any of them: students, administration, professors that plagiarized their way to the top, those who had connections to Epstein. Burn it down
        sorcerer-mar 1y ago
        Well no, he's extending well beyond his authority. That's the whole problem, and you're sitting here making excuses. You don't need to have sympathy for them. You need to respect the US Constitution's protection for them nonetheless. Or just admit that you hate America, which you're also welcome to do (because America rocks)! Also, absolutely lmfao about "connections to Epstein." Bro Epstein said on tape he was Trump's best friend [0]. Trump came out and said "Epstein likes em young" decades ago [1]. Trump also said on the Apprentice that he's good friends with Diddy [2]. You're in a cult amigo. Keep these comment threads around so when you wake up from whatever daze you're in, you can inspect them closely for clues about how he managed to break your brain so thoroughly. [0]: https://www.salon.com/2024/11/03/my-closest-friend-for-10-years-epstein-discusses-friendship-in-newly-released-tapes/ https://www.salon.com/2024/11/03/my-closest-friend-for-10-ye... [1]: https://www.youtube.com/shorts/ll1ZUjAB7lo https://www.youtube.com/shorts/ll1ZUjAB7lo [2]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wBbf3c0P_fc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wBbf3c0P_fc
NoImmatureAdHom 1y ago
Often, these protests were overtly supporting an organization officially classed as "terrorist" (HAMAS). The Americans making foreigners who are found to openly support a known terrorist organization leave is par for the course, I would say. If you showed up at the German border and told them you were a HAMAS supporter, my guess is you wouldn't get in. Now, the Trump admin is not this careful, and many people who are not overt HAMAS supporters have probably been affected. But I wish to make the point that there is a substantial group of students (non-citizen HAMAS supporters) for whom punishment is not crazy.
- sorcerer-mar 1y ago
  None of this allows the government to compel Harvard to do something. The government can revoke visas and deport people (after due process) if it wishes to and believes it can make its case.
  - NoImmatureAdHom 1y ago
    We agree!
- Snow_Falls 1y ago
  'often'? Do you have some statistics?
- sneak 1y ago
  Enough with this “known terrorist” nonsense. Verbally expressing support for terrorist groups is still protected speech.
  - sorcerer-mar 1y ago
    Few understand this. You’re allowed to openly advocate for whatever absolutely insane, horrific ideas you want. You’re allowed to be a Nazi, you’re allowed to be a Hamas (non-financial) supporter, you’re allowed to be a pro-Gaza genocide advocate if you want. You can advocate for the extermination or enslavement of all black or white or Christian or atheist or gay people if you want. You may (and probably should) become a social pariah and private parties can decline to affiliate with you, but the government isn’t allowed to do a damn thing about it.

This is exactly how division works. Threaten all and they turn on each other. "Why me? I'm not the one you want! Take them!" It's not so much about the Gaza protests, that's just another occassion to normalize division and mistrust within all parts of society.

gosub100 1y ago

[flagged]

sorcerer-mar 1y ago
Private schools can create and enforce their own rules how they wish. The United States government is forbidden from creating or enforcing rules on content of speech. It's actually only a 1st Amendment question in one case and not the other. Looks like they tricked ya though! (Technically it's a 1st Amendment question in both cases in that private entities have a 1st Amendment right to create rules for their own campuses)
- ty6853 1y ago
  In regards to protest though, the activity they are interested in, that is a right of 'the people to peaceably assemble' per 1A. Non-immigrants are not 'the people' per current interpretation of the constitution. If they were people, they would have all the rights ascribed to 'the people' including right to bear arms. Non immigrants do not have a right to bear arms, thus it cannot logically follow they are [the] people.
  - bigyabai 1y ago
    [flagged]
    - ty6853 1y ago
      You can read here, but in short 'the people' are those who are members of the 'political community' according to certain criteria. Generally this doesn't include non-immigrants. https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.ca5.214190/gov.uscourts.ca5.214190.103.1.pdf https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.ca5.214...
  - sorcerer-mar 1y ago
    > immigrants are not 'the people' per current interpretation of the constitution. Not true. The meaning of "the people" is interpreted differently from Amendment to Amendment. In the 1st and 5th Amendments, it has historically been interpreted to include non-citizens (even illegal ones!) while in the 2nd Amendment it has been interpreted much more narrowly. And regardless, this in no way authorizes the government to compel Harvard to do anything. Even in the most fascist interpretation you can dream up, it would mean the government itself is allowed to curtail their assembly. Harvard has no obligations (under the 1st Amendment!) to do any such thing.
    - ty6853 1y ago
      I'm not sure anyone can take seriously the proposition that 'the people' is Jekyll and Hyded amendment by amendment, especially when the constitution is completely devoid of any suggestion it is interpreted as such.
      - sorcerer-mar 1y ago
        That's a huge bummer because that is very clearly and unequivocally what the case law shows.
        ty6853 1y ago
        Constitution is the supreme law. The constitution does not make an amendment by amendment distinction what 'the people' is.
        sorcerer-mar 1y ago
        Ah... I see we're dealing with a much more fundamental misunderstanding than I thought! Are you American/did you attend American middle or high schools?
        ty6853 1y ago
        >he meaning of "the people" is interpreted differently from Amendment to Amendment. In the 1st and 5th Amendments, I went to the one where they didn't teach 'the people' was written anywhere in the 5th amendment. I'm definitely not being interested in being lectured by those who think imaginary words exist in the 5th amendment.
- gosub100 1y ago
  And private schools can suffer the consequences of oppressing certain groups.
  - sorcerer-mar 1y ago
    They sure can! You can choose not to attend them. You can go stand on public property and yell at them. Under the US Constitution, "the consequences" are absolutely not allowed to include weaponization of the State through coercion, punishment, or threat to control what the public thinks. Fascist goobers skipping out on their "Basics of Being an American" course lmao
    - gosub100 1y ago
      And I can vote for Trump who will cast shame and doubt on their reputation and damage them as far as his authority allows. I have no sympathy for any of them: students, administration, professors that plagiarized their way to the top, those who had connections to Epstein. Burn it down
      - sorcerer-mar 1y ago
        Well no, he's extending well beyond his authority. That's the whole problem, and you're sitting here making excuses. You don't need to have sympathy for them. You need to respect the US Constitution's protection for them nonetheless. Or just admit that you hate America, which you're also welcome to do (because America rocks)! Also, absolutely lmfao about "connections to Epstein." Bro Epstein said on tape he was Trump's best friend [0]. Trump came out and said "Epstein likes em young" decades ago [1]. Trump also said on the Apprentice that he's good friends with Diddy [2]. You're in a cult amigo. Keep these comment threads around so when you wake up from whatever daze you're in, you can inspect them closely for clues about how he managed to break your brain so thoroughly. [0]: https://www.salon.com/2024/11/03/my-closest-friend-for-10-years-epstein-discusses-friendship-in-newly-released-tapes/ https://www.salon.com/2024/11/03/my-closest-friend-for-10-ye... [1]: https://www.youtube.com/shorts/ll1ZUjAB7lo https://www.youtube.com/shorts/ll1ZUjAB7lo [2]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wBbf3c0P_fc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wBbf3c0P_fc

NoImmatureAdHom 1y ago

Often, these protests were overtly supporting an organization officially classed as "terrorist" (HAMAS). The Americans making foreigners who are found to openly support a known terrorist organization leave is par for the course, I would say. If you showed up at the German border and told them you were a HAMAS supporter, my guess is you wouldn't get in. Now, the Trump admin is not this careful, and many people who are not overt HAMAS supporters have probably been affected. But I wish to make the point that there is a substantial group of students (non-citizen HAMAS supporters) for whom punishment is not crazy.

sorcerer-mar 1y ago
None of this allows the government to compel Harvard to do something. The government can revoke visas and deport people (after due process) if it wishes to and believes it can make its case.
- NoImmatureAdHom 1y ago
  We agree!
Snow_Falls 1y ago
'often'? Do you have some statistics?
sneak 1y ago
Enough with this “known terrorist” nonsense. Verbally expressing support for terrorist groups is still protected speech.
- sorcerer-mar 1y ago
  Few understand this. You’re allowed to openly advocate for whatever absolutely insane, horrific ideas you want. You’re allowed to be a Nazi, you’re allowed to be a Hamas (non-financial) supporter, you’re allowed to be a pro-Gaza genocide advocate if you want. You can advocate for the extermination or enslavement of all black or white or Christian or atheist or gay people if you want. You may (and probably should) become a social pariah and private parties can decline to affiliate with you, but the government isn’t allowed to do a damn thing about it.