- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message

Alan Dershowitz: Stanford Law Disruptions Were Orchestrated by the National Lawyers Guild
Posted on 3/23/23 at 10:53 am
Posted on 3/23/23 at 10:53 am
quote:
It turns out that the disruption by several dozen Stanford University law school students of a speech to be given by federal judge Kyle Duncan was not a spontaneous exercise of freedom to protest.
It was a well-planned and carefully orchestrated effort to prevent other Stanford students from hearing the judge's conservative views. The disruption was organized by the local chapter of National Lawyers Guild as part of a nationwide effort to suppress conservative speech. Although not all the participants were associated with the NLG, the main organizers were. The Guild praised "every single person" who participated in the disruption, and called it "Stanford Law School at its best," suggesting it would confront "judicial architects of systems of oppression" with "social consequences for their actions." Here the consequences went beyond "social" to censorial.
Let us understand what the National Lawyers Guild is. Begun in the 1930s as an alternative to the American Bar Association, its original membership consisted of traditional left-wing liberals and communists. After Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union made the notorious Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact in 1939, most of the liberals resigned. Adolf Berle, a prominent "New Dealer," quit because it had become obvious that the Guild "is not prepared to take any stand which conflicts with the Communist Party line."
When Hitler then broke the pact and invaded the Soviet Union, the Guild changed its policy and rejected Hitler. After Japan attacked the United States in 1941, the Guild "remained silent" rather than oppose the internment of more than 100,000 Americans of Japanese descent.
In 1948, the Guild "supported the establishment of the State Israel" because that was the position of the Soviet Union. In 1967, the Soviet Union began to turn against Israel and increased support for the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), so did the Guild. Since that time, the Guild has been a strong supporter of Palestinian terrorism and other efforts to destroy Israel.
The Guild, in addition, refused to support Soviet or Cuban dissidents.
The Guild has never abandoned its Marxist-Leninist provenance. It supports Antifa, (see here, here, here and here) which also employs violence to disrupt speakers.
The National Lawyers Guild is not a liberal organization. It does not support civil liberties, due process or freedom of speech. It is the epitome of "free speech for me but not for thee." It will not be swayed by the argument that hateful, dangerous speech should be tolerated at any cost, and defines such speech broadly to include judicial decisions by Judge Duncan.
alan dershowitz newsletter/substack
Posted on 3/23/23 at 10:54 am to L.A.
quote:
National Lawyers Guild as part of a nationwide effort to suppress conservative speech.
Progressives have chosen the legal field as the tip of the spear to turn America over to the have nots.
Posted on 3/23/23 at 10:56 am to L.A.
That's a good summation of who and what the NLG actually is and has been.
Posted on 3/23/23 at 10:58 am to L.A.
We already knew that the National Lawyers Guild was the organization that headed up the shout-down.
The National Lawyers Guild has always been a radical organization. It has extremely small membership. They have no real standing in the legal profession at large.
The National Lawyers Guild has always been a radical organization. It has extremely small membership. They have no real standing in the legal profession at large.
This post was edited on 3/23/23 at 10:59 am
Posted on 3/23/23 at 11:00 am to TBoy
quote:
The National Lawyers Guild has always been a radical organization. It has extremely small membership. They have no real standing in the legal profession at large.
bullshite
The majority of that audience participated.
Posted on 3/23/23 at 11:02 am to RogerTheShrubber
quote:
quote:
National Lawyers Guild as part of a nationwide effort to suppress conservative speech.
Progressives have chosen the legal field as the tip of the spear to turn America over to the have nots.
tips of the spears
legal/judicial
education
election fraud
healthcare/ now biological weapons
rioting
really, anything supported by Soros or the rest of the marxist goons of the Democrat Party
Posted on 3/23/23 at 11:04 am to rhar61
Law schools are gone. There was plenty of radicalism when I was there, but the overriding goal at good law schools was to either achieve high levels of success in the public sector (like DOJ, etc.) or to make lots of money.
You know, like the goals of most corporations 15 years ago.
As is always the case, wokeness infects its host and changes the priority to the pursuit of wokeness. Which is why you have elite legal institutions suspending exams to allow students to deal with the "trauma" of a justified police shooting and appeals court judges being mocked by a majority of the student body at T5 law schools.
You know, like the goals of most corporations 15 years ago.
As is always the case, wokeness infects its host and changes the priority to the pursuit of wokeness. Which is why you have elite legal institutions suspending exams to allow students to deal with the "trauma" of a justified police shooting and appeals court judges being mocked by a majority of the student body at T5 law schools.
Posted on 3/23/23 at 11:07 am to RogerTheShrubber
Lawfare is the field of choice now for these DEMOCRAT simps
let the 'system' do all their dirty work
let the 'system' do all their dirty work
Posted on 3/23/23 at 11:09 am to TBoy
quote:
They have no real standing in the legal profession at large.
Thanks for coming to their defense and tossing their salad. Predictable leftist response.
Posted on 3/23/23 at 11:11 am to Pettifogger
quote:
wokeness infects its host and changes the priority
as with all parasites it can only survive when there is a healthy host to continue serving as food.
What actual parasites do is allow the host to survive - those that are invaribly fatal soon go extinct.
What turn the WOKE parasite will take is unknown - on its current course it will go extinct as soon as it kills its last productive host.
It appears to not have the IQ to predict the inevitable end point - so is consumed with spreading the infestation as far and wide and inevitable as possible.
Posted on 3/23/23 at 11:20 am to TBoy
quote:
The National Lawyers Guild has always been a radical organization. It has extremely small membership. They have no real standing in the legal profession at large.
But enough standing to effectively cancel a speaking engagement of a federal judge SOLELY because (ostensibly) they don't like his position. As Dershowitz further elaborates, this type of action will do nothing more than serve as a deterrent for other schools to no longer invite or allow "conservative" speakers to speak at their schools...which is the ultimate goal.
If you are an attorney, the action of the Stanford law students, more notably the faculty for acquiescing to them, should infuriate you. Not because of your political leanings. But because it is the antithesis of what the practice of law should be. As a lawyer you know and accept there are always two sides to an argument (sometimes more). The attorneys on each side are tasked with advocating for their client's position and allowing the court to make the ultimate ruling. If one (or both) sides don't agree with the ruling, there is an appellate process. But nowhere do you, as a lawyer, simply get to scream, cry, threaten and ridicule the other side to prevent them from presenting their argument/position. Yet, by acquiescing to such behavior, Stanford law (an the other law schools who will inevitably do so) are teaching their students (and presumably future lawyers) doing is both acceptable and favorable.
You can say they have no real standing in the legal profession at large. And you would be right. But, as someone else noted, it is a tip of the spear position. The students at Stanford are not going to face any real consequences for their behavior. So they, likeminded students at other schools, and the NLG will be even more embolden to take such action in the future with the ultimate goal of silencing any dissension. And it will likely be effective because the other schools will decide its better to just avoid the possibility of such an event occurring at their school rather than allow their students to be exposed to a diversity of viewpoints. That being the case, eventually there only becomes one "acceptable" viewpoint.
Posted on 3/23/23 at 11:26 am to TBoy
Extremely small is 25. They have almost 10k. Commie liar.
Popular
Back to top

4







