Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Texas Bar Application Adds Questions About Free Speech Following Shout Down at Stanford Law
Legal Insurrection ^ | 4/16/23 | Mike LaChance

Posted on 04/16/2023 3:18:05 PM PDT by CFW

That incident at Stanford has really brought attention to this issue. It’s great to see people responding.

The Washington Free Beacon reports:

"The state of Texas is updating its bar application to include questions about whether applicants have engaged in “incivility and violations of school policies,” according to a letter from the Texas Supreme Court obtained by the Washington Free Beacon. The change is a direct response to an incident at Stanford Law School last month in which students shouted down a federal judge.

Sen. Ted Cruz (R., Texas) wrote to the bar in March suggesting the change, arguing that Stanford Law School graduates should “be made to answer, in writing, whether they participated in the shameful harassment” of Fifth Circuit appellate judge Kyle Duncan, who was subjected to vulgar heckling when he attempted to deliver prepared remarks. The bar responded in early April, indicating that it planned to ask all applicants “directly” about their involvement in disruptive protests."

(Excerpt) Read more at legalinsurrection.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; US: Texas
KEYWORDS: barexam; civility; freespeech; texas
"“Texas’s board of bar examiners made the change after concluding that schools like Stanford—which did not discipline a single heckler—cannot be trusted to attest to an applicant’s character.”"

Not sure why they expect the students to be more honest than the school they attended.

1 posted on 04/16/2023 3:18:05 PM PDT by CFW
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: CFW

How does that affect schools where such mob action IS school policy? That seems to be most of them. Considering that all law sudents are required to take Critical Legal Studies courses which is learning how to use the law to defeat the law, what difference does it make?


2 posted on 04/16/2023 3:26:56 PM PDT by arthurus (covfefe33)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: arthurus

A firm would have to be nuts to hire a lawyer from ‘WOKE’ Stanford ...


3 posted on 04/16/2023 3:34:58 PM PDT by GOPJ (It's NOT 'gender affirming care' - it's SEXUAL MUTILATION OF A YOUNG PERSON. Don't use their words.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: CFW

Wake me up when Texas secedes so I can move there.


4 posted on 04/16/2023 3:35:31 PM PDT by chuckee ( )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CFW
For us all:

by Jim Robinson

Wouldn't it be great if we could complete this FReepathon in under 60 days? Please get your donations in early and let's get 'er done!

Thank you very much! Your support is greatly appreciated!

God bless you.

5 posted on 04/16/2023 3:39:48 PM PDT by Mark (DONATE ONCE every 3 months-is that a big deal?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GOPJ
"A firm would have to be nuts to hire a lawyer from ‘WOKE’ Stanford ..."

In my opinion a "firm" belt across their rear anatomy when growing up would have solved this problem.

6 posted on 04/16/2023 3:40:41 PM PDT by mosaicwolf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: arthurus

My law school was often referred to as Berkeley East. There should be a clause in bar admissions oaths of each state that requires the entering lawyer to admit that the 1st Amendment applies to all speech. It’s astonishing how many lawyers refer to “hate” speech as non-protected. Who would they make the arbiters of the contours of “hate” speech? There are many reasons to be embarrassed by my profession - but the woke/leftist bent of the law schools and national professional organizations (ABA, for example) is just disgusting.


7 posted on 04/16/2023 3:48:08 PM PDT by Wally_Kalbacken
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: CFW

Not sure how useful the actual questions will end up being, since “incivility” is subjective, and “violations of school policies” depend on policies set by leftist schools. Not quite as secure as asking someone if they are or ever have been a member of the communist party.


8 posted on 04/16/2023 4:03:42 PM PDT by Right Wing Vegan (Pot legalization licenses every degenerate pothead piece of trash to force drug neighbors.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CFW

My daughter took and passed the Unified Bar Exam. It covers her in 26 states.


9 posted on 04/16/2023 4:21:47 PM PDT by blackdog ((Z28.310) )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CFW

Her office is in Seattle. She’s always on the road to some litigation in some state.


10 posted on 04/16/2023 4:23:38 PM PDT by blackdog ((Z28.310) )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CFW

Yes...good point.

I’m thinking they need to ask some “conservative” questions and some “liberal” questions. Students should be aware of the other side of the argument.

Hmm...the sample tests I’m seeing are multiple choice. Back in the day, there was a fair amount of essay (I never took it but I had a friend in Louisiana who did).

-


11 posted on 04/16/2023 5:27:44 PM PDT by scrabblehack
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CFW

Doesn’t my right to free speech include a right to shut you down so I don’t have to listen to nonsense you have to say. Speech is not free if I can’t not hear nonsense. Surely your freedom stops at my auditory and neural networks.


12 posted on 04/16/2023 5:29:58 PM PDT by AndyJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CFW

In before Lyin Ted.


13 posted on 04/17/2023 3:04:06 AM PDT by momincombatboots (BQEphesians 6... who you are really at war with)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AndyJackson

You can exercise your right not to hear by leaving or ignoring the speaker. You may not abrogate the right of others to hear the message you disagree with. That is tyranny. This is really fundamental, simple stuff. I’m frankly surprised at you.


14 posted on 04/17/2023 5:49:14 AM PDT by _longranger81
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: _longranger81

Your sarcasm detector is off.


15 posted on 04/17/2023 5:56:22 AM PDT by AndyJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: _longranger81; AndyJackson

I think Andy’s post was sarcasm...


16 posted on 04/17/2023 5:59:42 AM PDT by 17th Miss Regt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: _longranger81

What about my constitutional right not to be offended?


17 posted on 04/17/2023 6:26:36 AM PDT by AndyJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: AndyJackson

I considered that. but it didn’t read like sarcasm to me.


18 posted on 04/17/2023 6:28:34 AM PDT by _longranger81
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: CFW

It would be easier to check for libtardism and filter out all the nazis


19 posted on 04/17/2023 12:43:30 PM PDT by NWFree (Sigma male 🤪)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson