Jump to content

Frank Drebin

Full Members
  • Posts

    2870
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Frank Drebin

  1. You disagree with the Second Circuit's opinion? Why?
  2. I wasn't framing anything you dumbfuck. I was responding to a post I quoted.
  3. Regulations of wearing masks or KKK hoods while assembling in public has been a thing for a century. Here is a more recent example where the Second Circuit rejected the Klan's right to hide their faces while assembling. https://www.nyclu.org/court-cases/church-american-knights-kkk-v-city-new-york-challenging-restriction-assembling-while-wearing On Jan. 20, 2004, the Second Circuit reversed the District Court. In doing so, the Second Circuit reasoned that the First Amendment right of anonymous speech does not embrace a right to conceal one’s appearance in a public demonstration.
  4. Did they comply with each of these policies? If not Hartzell is safe. If so, he should be in trouble.
  5. It is. But subject to time, place, and manner restrictions. Try and protest on the field during the 1st quarter of the Georgia game
  6. https://catalog.utexas.edu/general-information/appendices/appendix-c/speech-expression-and-assembly/
  7. So you are stating and are confident that these protesters were not violating the University's time, place, and manner restrictions? If you are correct, then Hartzell should be held accountable. And I will support that and agree with you.
  8. I would ask Hartzell. I don't know the current restrictions. If he is lying that they were violating them, then he should be held accountable. When I was at Texas, there were designated places for protests. You did not get to choose the areas to have a mass protest. They were subject to time, place, and manner restrictions -- which have been repeatedly affirmed by courts. I would assume Texas has written policies. If you are so sure they have been violated, go read them and let us know. I am trusting Hartzell right now.
  9. The protesters clearly stated (and published) their intent to occupy the campus. Hartzell said that violates campus policy on free speech and called the authorities to prevent any occupation.
  10. Here is Hartzell's statement, which part do you take issue with? Dear UT community, This has been a challenging day for many. We have witnessed much activity we normally do not experience on our campus, and there is understandably a lot of emotion surrounding these events. Today, our University held firm, enforcing our rules while protecting the Constitutional right to free speech. Peaceful protests within our rules are acceptable. Breaking our rules and policies and disrupting others’ ability to learn are not allowed. The group that led this protest stated it was going to violate Institutional Rules. Our rules matter, and they will be enforced. Our University will not be occupied. The protesters tried to deliver on their stated intent to occupy campus. People not affiliated with UT joined them, and many ignored University officials’ continual pleas for restraint and to immediately disperse. The University did as we said we would do in the face of prohibited actions. We were prepared, with the necessary support to maintain campus operations and ensure the safety, well-being and learning environment for our more than 50,000 students. We are grateful for the countless staff members and state and University law enforcement officers, as well as support personnel who exercised extraordinary restraint in the face of a difficult situation that is playing out at universities across the country. There is a way to exercise freedom of speech and civil discourse, and our Office of the Dean of Students has continued to offer ways to ensure protests can happen within the rules. The University of Texas will continue to take necessary steps so that all our University functions proceed without interruption. Sincerely yours, Jay Hartzell President
  11. I read the letter from Texas. It pretty clearly states the manner in which the protests were being conducted violated UT's free speech policies. UT thus called in authorities. They were not going to let them take over the university.
  12. Because it is a KKK tactic. They don't like being doxxed either. Two sides of the same coin.
  13. I don't know. I graduated 20+ years ago. But there were designated spaces for protests. Schools have time, place and manner restrictions for first amendment activities. These restrictions, if viewpoint neutral and compliant with court precedent, are enforceable. No matter how much you want to hide your face with a mask and protest Jews right to exist.
  14. I suspect they can protest all they want in the appropriate areas. But the masked protesters don’t want to do that. President Hartzell has explained that he isn’t going to allow them to take over areas that aren’t for protests. Nor should he.
  15. That would clearly not be a violation if that is what happened.
  16. I paid to be at UT also. That did not give me the right to stage organized protests in unauthorized areas. Shit I would have loved to protest in Greg Davis' office. But I would have been arrested no matter how polite I was.
  17. Many of these protesters are cowardly hiding their faces. Just like the KKK pussies.
  18. I think the school is basically just enforcing its time, place, and manner restrictions. You can say what you want so long as you do not cross the threatening or inciting imminent violence line. But that does not mean you get to do it wherever you want on campus. Time, place, and manner restrictions that are reasonable are perfectly lawful. If a group violates lawful time, place, and manner restrictions, they should be arrested/dispersed. No matter who the group is.
  19. The school has time, place and manner restrictions they intend to enforce. Do UT's time, place, and manner restrictions violate the constitution? I honestly do not know. But that seems to be what Hartzell is hanging his hat on. If not, protesters either need to obey them or risk being arrested. And by the way the protesters in masks are pussies.
  20. I would love to pick up a good ILB in portal.
  21. We’ve played tougher schedules than A&M something like 8 out of the 12 years they’ve been in the SeC.
  22. I have always heard that vax rates are high in Mexico and Central America. The bad diseases vaccines prevent were more recent/prevalent in those countries -- because USA had vaccvines earlier -- so people down south take them more seriously than many Americans do.
  23. I was hoping he would portal. I want Wisner getting all of those third string RB snaps. He's a lot better football player, and Wisner is the guy I do not want to lose.
  24. I will make sure to bump this thread and the one on Maalik in December. We will see who is right. I am not expecting much out of our 6th string running back who is 5'10" and 240 pounds with a fat gut. Or the quarterback who makes Garrett Gilbert look accurate and poised in the pocket. But for some weird reason you are a big fan boy of JAGs who transfer. But let me check to make sure I understand you. You think Maalik is going to be good at Duke. I don't. I also think Wisner is much, much better than Red. You don't. Is that right? Or is there some other point you were making here?
  25. Red is a JAG. I'd much rather Wisner get those snaps
×
×
  • Create New...