Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Ken's avatar

Pearls before swines.

Be not discouraged. Our Lord warned that these days would come. Children betraying their father’s and mothers. The slander. The love of evil in the name of the greater good. The upside down room.

Rod, I too have my fists clenched when I see this. Being a nearly life-long resident of Berkeley, this is all pretty standard. However it is getting more and more belligerent and the children are more hollow. Its gonna continue to get more weird. I cant have intelligent conversations here on the bay with too many anymore. Its all dogmatic sludge. However, if you go one town North of Berkeley there is a blue collar remnant in El Cerrito (named by the Spanish “The Little Mountain of Saint Anthony.”). This is the home of Creedence and Metallica. Its not hard to find sane folks here.

...these little silver-spooned shithead brats have nothing but contempt for the working class. They are the wave before the jackboots start hob-nailing down the streets of torchlit syncopated gloom. They are the Einsatzgruppen, the left’s John the Baptist precursor for the coming false messiah, the voice of Puritanical Humanism. Anti Christ. The good news is that the Church of Jesus Christ always thrives in persecution. They mark themselves. We must be strong and remain anchored in the Holy Word. God always wins.

“God is dead” - Nietzsche

“Nietzsche is dead.” -God

Be strong.

God bless.

Expand full comment
Mike Aslan's avatar

Stanford Law's administration should be ashamed of itself and the childish antics it has fomented among a segment of its students. It should immediately issue an apology to Judge Duncan, the student branch of the Federalist Society, and the greater student body that it has failed. It should also immediately discipline the DEI administrator. I know, this is all more than wishful thinking, as the administration is a bunch of myopic cowards.

As a lawyer, I cannot conceive how any of these students will be able to effectively practice law. They will be terrible advocates for their clients because they will not be able to look at multiple factual and evidentiary perspectives with neutral eyes, they will be unable to interpret legal opinions without an ironclad bias, they will not be able to compromise or negotiate when it is in their client's interest, they will be disrespectful to other lawyers, to witnesses, and to the judiciary, and they will not be able to be honest with their clients about the challenges in their cases.

I cannot imagine working with such individuals, nor can I conceive that these students will understand and display the professionalism and decorum required to be a good lawyer, and to safeguard the profession as a whole.

One of the things I took away from my ethics class in law school all those years ago was the need to respect the judiciary, even when a judge issues opinions I might not agree with. The idea of publicly trashing a judge was impossible to imagine.

In fact, some lawyers who have avoided this ethical obligation have been professionally disciplined by their bar association. Take, for example, this comment in California's code of professional conduct, which all lawyers should adhere to: "To maintain the fair and independent administration of justice, lawyers should defend judges and

courts unjustly criticized. Lawyers also are obligated to maintain the respect due to the courts of justice and judicial officers."

Did anyone see any sign of respect for Judge Duncan at that lecture? Absolutely not. And the foremost violator of that principle was the DEI officer. For shame. She could truly be brought before the bar association for an ethics violation. She probably would not be disciplined, but I am confident she would be verbally admonished and warned, as she should be. What a disgusting example she is for those training to be lawyers.

And as for those students who engaged in insulting the judge, I highly doubt any of them have even read more than an excerpt or two from Judge Duncan's many written opinions. They have no courtroom experience, and they are in for a rude awakening when they actually have to go before a judge and argue a case. Their arrogance won't be tolerated by the overwhelming majority of judges and opposing attorneys who (thankfully) attended state schools and not such an arrogant and blindly out of touch school like Stanford.

Lastly, you better believe that many federal judges will privately choose not to employ Stanford law students as their law clerks after watching these shenanigans. I can only hope other employers will see the faces of the students in the video so that they can protect themselves from making an awful hire.

Expand full comment
120 more comments...

No posts