War on Universities, Lawyers & Expertise

  • Thread starter Thread starter nycfan
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies: 280
  • Views: 5K
  • Politics 
I honestly wonder if Trump is going to end up splintering the conservative legal movement. The Federalist Society has been remarkably successful in its political project - the federal government and federal judiciary are staffed with a disproportionate number of far-right ideologues, a small minority of the legal community. But now there are a lot of FedSoc types - I don't know if all those folks you mentioned are members, but any former Scalia and Alito clerks are certainly going to have tendencies in that direction - who are in open conflict with the excesses of the Trump DOJ. It would be really funny for the FedSoc to essentially cement its influence over the American government and judiciary and then almost immediately lose it because they're letting the most extreme folks steer the bus.
Yeah, it's an interesting moment. I am certainly not a SCOTUS clerk myself but I know/work with a good number of them, including some Scalia/Alito/Thomas clerks, and not a single one of them is comfortable with what Trump is doing to the constitutional order. Luttig was the bellwether, but when you look at things like Wilkinson's recent opinion, it's hard not to think the courts, and the legal intelligentcia, might finally have had enough. I just hope it's not too late.
 
I doubt this one even gets to the Supreme Court. The administration has been testing its power over major universities. It didn't help that a couple caved so quickly. But I will be very surprised if they really want to fight with Harvard. They'll reach some agreement that's basically meaningless and claim victory.
I dunno. When it comes to these lawsuits, the Trump admin seems to care more about its political messaging than it does about assessing realistic chances of winning. I think they're gonna lose this case. But any DOJ lawyer who says that will probably get fired rather than listened to. Trump is going to lose all the law firm executive order cases too, and they haven't cut a deal with the firms who are fighting yet either. Candidly I suspect they're worried that if they cut a deal with people who sue to enjoin these ridiculous targeting orders, they'll show others in the future that you can get a better deal by actually showing some backbone and fighting. So I think it's more likely they intend to go down swinging here.
 
Yeah, it's an interesting moment. I am certainly not a SCOTUS clerk myself but I know/work with a good number of them, including some Scalia/Alito/Thomas clerks, and not a single one of them is comfortable with what Trump is doing to the constitutional order. Luttig was the bellwether, but when you look at things like Wilkinson's recent opinion, it's hard not to think the courts, and the legal intelligentcia, might finally have had enough. I just hope it's not too late.
It doesn’t take a genius, legal or otherwise, to recognize the long term implications of letting Trump run roughshod over the constitution.
 
I dunno. When it comes to these lawsuits, the Trump admin seems to care more about its political messaging than it does about assessing realistic chances of winning. I think they're gonna lose this case. But any DOJ lawyer who says that will probably get fired rather than listened to. Trump is going to lose all the law firm executive order cases too, and they haven't cut a deal with the firms who are fighting yet either. Candidly I suspect they're worried that if they cut a deal with people who sue to enjoin these ridiculous targeting orders, they'll show others in the future that you can get a better deal by actually showing some backbone and fighting. So I think it's more likely they intend to go down swinging here.
I guess we'll see, but it doesn't sound like Linda is looking for a three-round match in the Octagon.


Secretary of Education Linda McMahon said today she spoke to the presidents of Columbia and Harvard about “how we could make sure that the universities were abiding by the law,” insisting the Trump administration’s recent demands are not about freedom of speech.

“I made it very clear that these are not First Amendment infractions. This is civil rights. This is making sure that students on all campuses can come and learn and be safe … and that is why we have had these funds either withheld or frozen during this period of time of negotiation,” she said on CNBC’s “Squawk Box.”

The education secretary emphasized that the letter Harvard University received from the administration that outlined a slew of demands tied to federal funding was a “point of negotiation.”

Harvard President Alan M. Garber said last week the demands in the letter were “unprecedented” and made “to control the Harvard community,” adding that the university “will not surrender its independence or relinquish its constitutional rights.”

On Monday, Harvard sued the Trump administration over the government’s funding freeze, calling it “unlawful and beyond the government’s authority.”

McMahon said today that the letter was not a “final offer,” saying she hoped the university will “come back to the table.”

McMahon said she’s “pleased” with negotiations with Columbia University — which made policy changes in March in response to Trump administration demands — though she said the negotiations are not finalized.

McMahon also addressed the news that the Department of Education will restart collecting federal student loans in default on May 5, telling CNBC, “It is not fair that other people are having to assume this, you know, this burden that other taxpayers are paying for these loans.”
 
I guess we'll see, but it doesn't sound like Linda is looking for a three-round match in the Octagon.


Secretary of Education Linda McMahon said today she spoke to the presidents of Columbia and Harvard about “how we could make sure that the universities were abiding by the law,” insisting the Trump administration’s recent demands are not about freedom of speech.

“I made it very clear that these are not First Amendment infractions. This is civil rights. This is making sure that students on all campuses can come and learn and be safe … and that is why we have had these funds either withheld or frozen during this period of time of negotiation,” she said on CNBC’s “Squawk Box.”

The education secretary emphasized that the letter Harvard University received from the administration that outlined a slew of demands tied to federal funding was a “point of negotiation.”

Harvard President Alan M. Garber said last week the demands in the letter were “unprecedented” and made “to control the Harvard community,” adding that the university “will not surrender its independence or relinquish its constitutional rights.”

On Monday, Harvard sued the Trump administration over the government’s funding freeze, calling it “unlawful and beyond the government’s authority.”

McMahon said today that the letter was not a “final offer,” saying she hoped the university will “come back to the table.”

McMahon said she’s “pleased” with negotiations with Columbia University — which made policy changes in March in response to Trump administration demands — though she said the negotiations are not finalized.

McMahon also addressed the news that the Department of Education will restart collecting federal student loans in default on May 5, telling CNBC, “It is not fair that other people are having to assume this, you know, this burden that other taxpayers are paying for these loans.”
First of all, that's Linda McMahon. That's not Trump or the DOJ. But in any event, I am not disputing that Trump wants to negotiate with these universities, but he wants to negotiate with them using the threat of withholding funds as leverage. If Harvard removes that leverage via litigation, what will there be to negotiate about? Trump only wants to negotiate from a position of power, so if he loses that position of power he will go down swinging trying to get it back. Just my opinion.
 
Yeah, it's an interesting moment. I am certainly not a SCOTUS clerk myself but I know/work with a good number of them, including some Scalia/Alito/Thomas clerks,
How old are they? I've been under the impression that the quality of the conservative justice clerks in the past 10-15 years has fallen considerably, and they never had all that much quality to begin with (especially for Thomas clerks -- Thomas being viewed as sort of a half-clerkship in many circles for a long time). What's your take? I haven't met any new clerks in a decade . . .
 

Over 150 college presidents sign letter rebuking Trump administration 'overreach'​

Presidents from each Ivy League school — except for Dartmouth — signed onto the letter.


“… "As leaders of America’s colleges, universities, and scholarly societies, we speak with one voice against the unprecedented government overreach and political interference now endangering American higher education," the letter, orchestrated by the American Association of Colleges and Universities, says.

"We are open to constructive reform and do not oppose legitimate government oversight," the letter continues. "However, we must oppose undue government intrusion in the lives of those who learn, live, and work on our campuses."

"We will always seek effective and fair financial practices, but we must reject the coercive use of public research funding," it adds.

Harrison Fields, a White House spokesperson, said in an email that the administration is "standing up for equality and fairness and will not be swayed by worthless letters by overpaid blowhards." …”

 

Over 150 college presidents sign letter rebuking Trump administration 'overreach'​

Presidents from each Ivy League school — except for Dartmouth — signed onto the letter.


“… "As leaders of America’s colleges, universities, and scholarly societies, we speak with one voice against the unprecedented government overreach and political interference now endangering American higher education," the letter, orchestrated by the American Association of Colleges and Universities, says.

"We are open to constructive reform and do not oppose legitimate government oversight," the letter continues. "However, we must oppose undue government intrusion in the lives of those who learn, live, and work on our campuses."

"We will always seek effective and fair financial practices, but we must reject the coercive use of public research funding," it adds.

Harrison Fields, a White House spokesperson, said in an email that the administration is "standing up for equality and fairness and will not be swayed by worthless letters by overpaid blowhards." …”

Looks like Duke & Davidson folks signed on, not so any UNC System schools (or Wake).
 
Looks like Duke & Davidson folks signed on, not so any UNC System schools (or Wake).
Overwhelmingly private schools, from my scan. There are probably a few more mixed in, but the only state flagships I noticed were Maryland and UVA.
 
The prohibition on civil lawsuits against the president makes sense, given how easy it would be for the court systems to be deluged.

But it really should not apply to defamation. People should be able to sue the president when he falsely accuses them of egregious and unlawful acts.
 

Trump targeting college accreditation process in new executive order​



“… The executive order asks the secretary of education to “hold higher education accreditors accountable including through denial, monitoring, suspension, or termination for poor performance or violations to the federal Civil Rights Act,” the White House official told CNN.

It also “directs the attorney general and the secretary of education to investigate and terminate unlawful discrimination by American higher education institutions, including law schools and medical schools,” the official said.

The action was spearheaded by Trump’s Domestic Policy Council, the official said, as part of ongoing efforts by deputy chief of staff Stephen Miller and others to advance the president’s agenda on higher education. …”
 

Trump Signs Executive Order Targeting University Accreditors​

Move is latest in effort to remake higher education after the president and other Republicans have long criticized the accreditation process​


🎁 🔗 —> https://www.wsj.com/us-news/educati...cc?st=WpcenX&reflink=mobilewebshare_permalink

IMG_6635.jpeg
“… Trump signed a number of other education-related executive orders Wednesday, including ones looking at artificial intelligence and discipline policies in K-12 schools, one supporting historically Black colleges and universities, one on increasing apprenticeships and creating job pipelines, and another reinforcing rules universities must follow when reporting foreign funds.

… Trump and other Republicans have long criticized the accreditation process, calling it a cartel that stifles competition and doesn’t help police colleges and universities with poor student outcomes. Accreditors, which must be approved by the federal government, argue they help maintain the integrity of schools and work with those that are struggling.

… “Revoking accreditation is an existential threat for these universities,” said Andrew Gillen, a research fellow at the Cato Institute. “If you lose Pell grants and lose student loans, for most colleges that means you’re done.”

During Trump’s first administration, he eliminated geographic restrictions that had given some accreditors control over specific regions in the country. Now, universities are free to choose their oversight body, though few have switched since the rule changed in 2019.

… The American Bar Association’s law school accrediting arm said in February it would pause enforcement of a standard that requires schools to consider diversity in hiring and admissions, which was in the process of being revised. Attorney General Pam Bondi sent the accreditor a letter demanding the requirement be permanently scrapped, and the ABA responded that it wouldn’t revisit the rule again before May. …”
 
Scary story of some unidentified people claiming to be officials seeming to try to intimidate a lawyer who offered some very basic pro bono advice to undocumented immigrants — just this guy’s word for it, so maybe he is making it up(?). In a way, I hope it is a hoax, b/c it is a lot more worrisome if it is true.

 
Back
Top