(10-13-2022 10:17 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(10-13-2022 10:10 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(10-13-2022 10:07 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  I think Yale law has put itself in the same category as Oberlin. If it takes a boycott or a court settlement to get them to change course, so be it.

Yes, I know Yale is taking steps. It is not clear if those are real steps, with teeth, effect, or permanency, or just wallpaper, and it is also not clear if they are the the result of this boycott or not, but in any case, it is rare to see a jockey whip his steed just once. Usually they whip them across the finish line. Probably Yale needs further urging to continue across the finish line.

Before you levy that accusation, you need to back up how Yale, the university, acted similarly to Oberlin.

Oberlin, the college, unequivocally acted in the wrong by defaming that baker (IIRC) and crossed a line as an institution.

The complaints for Yale Law seem to be focused solely on how students are acting, and not that Yale Law is prohibiting or restricting speech on campus.

The complaints are that Yale is acting (or better yet, non action) in a role that provides tacit approval for the students actions.

So no, they are not "focused solely on how students are acting".

What does Yale's policy say regarding how students should be handled? Both in the line that can't be crossed and disciplinary action for crossing said line?

It's hard to have a conversation about Yale being complicit without discussing their policy and how they're failing (or successfully) enforcing it. Perhaps it doesn't go far enough and students that protest too much should be expelled?

Since you and OO are talking about this in depth, I'm guessing you'll be able to provide that information easily - I didn't feel like Googling it.