Author Topic: Athletes Forcing Change  (Read 13041 times)

BostonPancake and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline eastcat

  • Racist Piece of Shit
  • Katpak'r
  • ***
  • Posts: 2502
  • Labeled by children.
    • View Profile
Re: Athletes Forcing Change
« Reply #250 on: June 30, 2020, 11:37:24 AM »
Remember how bothered gE posters get when they'd see the "racist piece of crap" tag in their profile here?

KSU as a university can't brand a student that, but the community can.  Long before the tweet, EMAW's and MHK'rs should've been pointing the kid out everywhere he goes and announcing there goes the racist piece of crap.

What? How immature of behavior is that?

This event with GF was originally about police brutality. That was a valid conclusion and concern. It has been hijacked into a society engineering wealth redistribution plan like Zimbabwe.

All dissent bullied and shouted down in the name of racism.

Offline sonofdaxjones

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 34068
    • View Profile
Re: Athletes Forcing Change
« Reply #251 on: June 30, 2020, 11:37:46 AM »
Once again, plenty of ammo to get rid of the kid.   Still extremely pleased some of you don't run K-State.


Offline BIG APPLE CAT

  • smelly poor
  • Katpak'r
  • ***
  • Posts: 1835
  • slide rule enthusiast
    • View Profile
Re: Athletes Forcing Change
« Reply #252 on: June 30, 2020, 11:48:02 AM »
this might be another spracne question but if one decides to become a student at kansas state university and as a condition of enrollment you agree - either in writing or implied by your attendance - that you will abide by the ksu honor code...isn't that an instance of the student knowingly and willfully forfeiting some of their constitutional rights in order to participate? Like yes you can make your "this is unconstitutional" argument all you want but if if you agree to abide by the honor code then you just agreed to an additional set of rules/restrictions.

Offline Trim

  • Global Moderator
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 37034
  • "Tacky" -Kietz
    • View Profile
Re: Athletes Forcing Change
« Reply #253 on: June 30, 2020, 11:49:07 AM »
Remember how bothered gE posters get when they'd see the "racist piece of crap" tag in their profile here?

KSU as a university can't brand a student that, but the community can.  Long before the tweet, EMAW's and MHK'rs should've been pointing the kid out everywhere he goes and announcing there goes the racist piece of crap.

What? How immature of behavior is that?

This event with GF was originally about police brutality. That was a valid conclusion and concern. It has been hijacked into a society engineering wealth redistribution plan like Zimbabwe.

All dissent bullied and shouted down in the name of racism.

Mods, add to group.

Offline ksuchris2000

  • Fan
  • *
  • Posts: 214
    • View Profile
Re: Athletes Forcing Change
« Reply #254 on: June 30, 2020, 11:58:31 AM »
Once again, plenty of ammo to get rid of the kid.   Still extremely pleased some of you don't run K-State.

There's no ammo that will stand legal scrutiny. If this kid gets kicked out and has the wherewithal to come back and sue the university, he'll very likely win.

There have been a few students booted from public universities (OU for one) and the students have not come back at the university with lawsuits, but expelling students for protected speech is a dog that won't hunt for long. The ACLU has historically gone after institutions who punishment students for exercising free speech, but has so far stayed out of the 'racist' protected speech issues.

ACLU Blurb on topic:

Quote
CAN I BE PUNISHED FOR EXERCISING MY RIGHT TO FREE SPEECH?
Students retain their right to free speech in the public school setting, but that doesn’t mean you can say whatever you want anytime you want. For example, you can be disciplined for violating a bullying policy that bars students from threatening or repeatedly harassing other students, even if it’s “just words.” On the other hand, a bullying policy that punishes you for causing another student “emotional harm,” a very vague and open-ended standard, probably violates your free speech rights.

You are generally free to express your political views on buttons and T-shirts. In that vein, a court upheld the right of students to wear breast cancer awareness bracelets that said “I <3 boobies”; on the other hand, the U.S. Supreme Court approved the discipline of a student who gave an off-color school auditorium speech. In short, many of these issues are evaluated on a case-by-case basis and may not have simple answers.

Schools are much more limited in trying to discipline you for comments you make outside the school setting, such as on Facebook or other social media, unless they can demonstrate that it caused disruption in school. If you think your free speech rights were violated at school because you were punished for something you said, then you should contact the ACLU or an attorney.




« Last Edit: June 30, 2020, 12:01:41 PM by ksuchris2000 »

Offline catastrophe

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 10078
    • View Profile
Re: Athletes Forcing Change
« Reply #255 on: June 30, 2020, 12:09:22 PM »
this might be another spracne question but if one decides to become a student at kansas state university and as a condition of enrollment you agree - either in writing or implied by your attendance - that you will abide by the ksu honor code...isn't that an instance of the student knowingly and willfully forfeiting some of their constitutional rights in order to participate? Like yes you can make your "this is unconstitutional" argument all you want but if if you agree to abide by the honor code then you just agreed to an additional set of rules/restrictions.
Did you read my airtight plan of raising tuition $200k and making an unlimited number of scholarships available for students who aren’t a racist POS?

Offline Spracne

  • Point Plank'r
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *
  • Posts: 12126
  • Distinguished Scholar/Gentleman
    • View Profile
Re: Athletes Forcing Change
« Reply #256 on: June 30, 2020, 12:12:45 PM »
this might be another spracne question but if one decides to become a student at kansas state university and as a condition of enrollment you agree - either in writing or implied by your attendance - that you will abide by the ksu honor code...isn't that an instance of the student knowingly and willfully forfeiting some of their constitutional rights in order to participate? Like yes you can make your "this is unconstitutional" argument all you want but if if you agree to abide by the honor code then you just agreed to an additional set of rules/restrictions.

I'll be honest, I don't know the precise contours of the answer to your question, but I do know that contracts that purport to waive constitutional rights are difficult to enforce, particularly where there is uneven bargaining power and/or it is a contract of adhesion rather than a contract freely negotiated at arms-length. The fact that, in this instance, it is essentially the state asking you to waive your constitutional rights via a contract of adhesion, I would think that would garner additional skepticism by a court.

Offline michigancat

  • Contributor
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 42992
  • change your stupid avatar.
    • View Profile
Re: Athletes Forcing Change
« Reply #257 on: June 30, 2020, 12:15:44 PM »
are there any government services that can be denied to racists? I was thinking maybe small business loans or grants might not be given to businesses that do something like exclusively sell swastika stickers.

Offline DQ12

  • PCKK7DC Survivor
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *******
  • Posts: 19778
  • #TeamChestHair
    • View Profile
Re: Athletes Forcing Change
« Reply #258 on: June 30, 2020, 12:17:06 PM »
You would be incorrect. That phrase does not refer to disrupting someone's internal peace; it refers to a state of lawlessness that is considered dangerous. For example, let's say you're repossessing someone's tractor because you loaned them money to purchase the tractor and they defaulted on the loan. When you show up, the farmer is sitting on the tractor with a shotgun. You cannot then repossess the tractor without causing a breach of the peace, so you can no longer privately repossess it.
There's a practical element to this.  K-State can do whatever it wants.  There's very little (if anything) K-State can do to punish protected (i.e. racist) speech within the bounds of the constitution.

If K-State needs some pretext to boot this guy (or the next guy) off campus or otherwise punish him in any meaningful way, "breach of peace" is as good (and as bad) as any, imo.

No, K-State cannot do just whatever it wants. It's a state university. The state owns it, runs it, allots it money etc.  It is a state actor regardless of which way the political winds happen to be blowing. I forgot that part of the Constitution where it said, hey these rights we discussed, nevermind ... they don’t rough ridin' apply if a school has a code of conduct. Being expelled is punishment.  The First Amendment prevents state actors from retaliating against individuals for protected speech.  It isn't just limited to protection from being jailed.

The whole reason for the code of conduct change is so that students can be removed for similar comments in the future. This is setting up the university to be sued in multiple ways when the next racist bad person like this kid gets kicked out for similar statements/tweets/FB posts. I understand that it wasn't really a joke to him. I understand who he is and the groups he associates with. I also understand that as a grown adult, sometimes you have to just walk on by the trash.

This little punk's comment was horribly insensitive, specifically intended to rile people up, comes at a politically hostile time, and is not worth the time it takes to read.

Yet, here we are anyways.
Yes, K-State can.  If K-State wants to expel him or anyone like him, they can do it in the next ten minutes.  Whether, down the line, the guy sues and K-State gets told by some judge that they have to let him back in is another (and overwhelmingly likely) story.

I get how the first amendment and student speech works, but the practicalities of constitutional protections being enforced require more than the bare unconstitutional action.


"You want to stand next to someone and not be able to hear them, walk your ass into Manhattan, Kansas." - [REDACTED]

Offline sonofdaxjones

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 34068
    • View Profile
Re: Athletes Forcing Change
« Reply #259 on: June 30, 2020, 12:40:52 PM »
Once again, plenty of ammo to get rid of the kid.   Still extremely pleased some of you don't run K-State.

There's no ammo that will stand legal scrutiny. If this kid gets kicked out and has the wherewithal to come back and sue the university, he'll very likely win.

There have been a few students booted from public universities (OU for one) and the students have not come back at the university with lawsuits, but expelling students for protected speech is a dog that won't hunt for long. The ACLU has historically gone after institutions who punishment students for exercising free speech, but has so far stayed out of the 'racist' protected speech issues.

ACLU Blurb on topic:

Quote
CAN I BE PUNISHED FOR EXERCISING MY RIGHT TO FREE SPEECH?
Students retain their right to free speech in the public school setting, but that doesn’t mean you can say whatever you want anytime you want. For example, you can be disciplined for violating a bullying policy that bars students from threatening or repeatedly harassing other students, even if it’s “just words.” On the other hand, a bullying policy that punishes you for causing another student “emotional harm,” a very vague and open-ended standard, probably violates your free speech rights.

You are generally free to express your political views on buttons and T-shirts. In that vein, a court upheld the right of students to wear breast cancer awareness bracelets that said “I <3 boobies”; on the other hand, the U.S. Supreme Court approved the discipline of a student who gave an off-color school auditorium speech. In short, many of these issues are evaluated on a case-by-case basis and may not have simple answers.

Schools are much more limited in trying to discipline you for comments you make outside the school setting, such as on Facebook or other social media, unless they can demonstrate that it caused disruption in school. If you think your free speech rights were violated at school because you were punished for something you said, then you should contact the ACLU or an attorney.

You're FOS, bro.

There's plenty of information that indicates this guy was creating an atmosphere of intimidation.

This isn't some dork thinking he's gonna try and make a funny and gets embarrassed.    This is an individual engaged in a systemic process to spur others to intimidate people on campus.    I'm sure there's lefties engaged in the same behavior, they need to be dealt with as well. 


Offline kashi1965

  • Fan
  • *
  • Posts: 190
    • View Profile
Re: Athletes Forcing Change
« Reply #260 on: June 30, 2020, 12:42:00 PM »
You would be incorrect. That phrase does not refer to disrupting someone's internal peace; it refers to a state of lawlessness that is considered dangerous. For example, let's say you're repossessing someone's tractor because you loaned them money to purchase the tractor and they defaulted on the loan. When you show up, the farmer is sitting on the tractor with a shotgun. You cannot then repossess the tractor without causing a breach of the peace, so you can no longer privately repossess it.
There's a practical element to this.  K-State can do whatever it wants.  There's very little (if anything) K-State can do to punish protected (i.e. racist) speech within the bounds of the constitution.

If K-State needs some pretext to boot this guy (or the next guy) off campus or otherwise punish him in any meaningful way, "breach of peace" is as good (and as bad) as any, imo.

No, K-State cannot do just whatever it wants. It's a state university. The state owns it, runs it, allots it money etc.  It is a state actor regardless of which way the political winds happen to be blowing. I forgot that part of the Constitution where it said, hey these rights we discussed, nevermind ... they don’t rough ridin' apply if a school has a code of conduct. Being expelled is punishment.  The First Amendment prevents state actors from retaliating against individuals for protected speech.  It isn't just limited to protection from being jailed.

The whole reason for the code of conduct change is so that students can be removed for similar comments in the future. This is setting up the university to be sued in multiple ways when the next racist bad person like this kid gets kicked out for similar statements/tweets/FB posts. I understand that it wasn't really a joke to him. I understand who he is and the groups he associates with. I also understand that as a grown adult, sometimes you have to just walk on by the trash.

This little punk's comment was horribly insensitive, specifically intended to rile people up, comes at a politically hostile time, and is not worth the time it takes to read.

Yet, here we are anyways.
Yes, K-State can.  If K-State wants to expel him or anyone like him, they can do it in the next ten minutes.  Whether, down the line, the guy sues and K-State gets told by some judge that they have to let him back in is another (and overwhelmingly likely) story.

I get how the first amendment and student speech works, but the practicalities of constitutional protections being enforced require more than the bare unconstitutional action.
well then my vote is find a reason to expel him and do it. if he gets a judge to let him back in then at least KSU has shown they did everything possible. i can't wait for the first report of him being seen on campus. i wonder if he will ever be on campus and if he is even from kansas?

Offline kashi1965

  • Fan
  • *
  • Posts: 190
    • View Profile
Re: Athletes Forcing Change
« Reply #261 on: June 30, 2020, 12:45:30 PM »
Once again, plenty of ammo to get rid of the kid.   Still extremely pleased some of you don't run K-State.

There's no ammo that will stand legal scrutiny. If this kid gets kicked out and has the wherewithal to come back and sue the university, he'll very likely win.

There have been a few students booted from public universities (OU for one) and the students have not come back at the university with lawsuits, but expelling students for protected speech is a dog that won't hunt for long. The ACLU has historically gone after institutions who punishment students for exercising free speech, but has so far stayed out of the 'racist' protected speech issues.

ACLU Blurb on topic:

Quote
CAN I BE PUNISHED FOR EXERCISING MY RIGHT TO FREE SPEECH?
Students retain their right to free speech in the public school setting, but that doesn’t mean you can say whatever you want anytime you want. For example, you can be disciplined for violating a bullying policy that bars students from threatening or repeatedly harassing other students, even if it’s “just words.” On the other hand, a bullying policy that punishes you for causing another student “emotional harm,” a very vague and open-ended standard, probably violates your free speech rights.

You are generally free to express your political views on buttons and T-shirts. In that vein, a court upheld the right of students to wear breast cancer awareness bracelets that said “I <3 boobies”; on the other hand, the U.S. Supreme Court approved the discipline of a student who gave an off-color school auditorium speech. In short, many of these issues are evaluated on a case-by-case basis and may not have simple answers.

Schools are much more limited in trying to discipline you for comments you make outside the school setting, such as on Facebook or other social media, unless they can demonstrate that it caused disruption in school. If you think your free speech rights were violated at school because you were punished for something you said, then you should contact the ACLU or an attorney.

You're FOS, bro.

There's plenty of information that indicates this guy was creating an atmosphere of intimidation.

This isn't some dork thinking he's gonna try and make a funny and gets embarrassed.    This is an individual engaged in a systemic process to spur others to intimidate people on campus.    I'm sure there's lefties engaged in the same behavior, they need to be dealt with as well.
if this is correct i think it will be pretty easy to show a pattern of comments trying to initiate disruption. disruption of what might be the key issue for someone smarter than me but he is definitely trying his hardest to disrupt people/systems/groups/

Offline memphis

  • Katpak'r
  • ***
  • Posts: 1963
    • View Profile
Re: Athletes Forcing Change
« Reply #262 on: June 30, 2020, 12:54:04 PM »
?s=21

Wow I wonder if the doxxing is real? Huh...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

So this person will be a hero?

Offline PurpleOil

  • Combo-Fan
  • **
  • Posts: 771
  • Make it rain
    • View Profile
Re: Athletes Forcing Change
« Reply #263 on: June 30, 2020, 01:23:46 PM »
You would be incorrect. That phrase does not refer to disrupting someone's internal peace; it refers to a state of lawlessness that is considered dangerous. For example, let's say you're repossessing someone's tractor because you loaned them money to purchase the tractor and they defaulted on the loan. When you show up, the farmer is sitting on the tractor with a shotgun. You cannot then repossess the tractor without causing a breach of the peace, so you can no longer privately repossess it.
There's a practical element to this.  K-State can do whatever it wants.  There's very little (if anything) K-State can do to punish protected (i.e. racist) speech within the bounds of the constitution.

If K-State needs some pretext to boot this guy (or the next guy) off campus or otherwise punish him in any meaningful way, "breach of peace" is as good (and as bad) as any, imo.

No, K-State cannot do just whatever it wants. It's a state university. The state owns it, runs it, allots it money etc.  It is a state actor regardless of which way the political winds happen to be blowing. I forgot that part of the Constitution where it said, hey these rights we discussed, nevermind ... they don’t rough ridin' apply if a school has a code of conduct. Being expelled is punishment.  The First Amendment prevents state actors from retaliating against individuals for protected speech.  It isn't just limited to protection from being jailed.

The whole reason for the code of conduct change is so that students can be removed for similar comments in the future. This is setting up the university to be sued in multiple ways when the next racist bad person like this kid gets kicked out for similar statements/tweets/FB posts. I understand that it wasn't really a joke to him. I understand who he is and the groups he associates with. I also understand that as a grown adult, sometimes you have to just walk on by the trash.

This little punk's comment was horribly insensitive, specifically intended to rile people up, comes at a politically hostile time, and is not worth the time it takes to read.

Yet, here we are anyways.
Yes, K-State can.  If K-State wants to expel him or anyone like him, they can do it in the next ten minutes.  Whether, down the line, the guy sues and K-State gets told by some judge that they have to let him back in is another (and overwhelmingly likely) story.

I get how the first amendment and student speech works, but the practicalities of constitutional protections being enforced require more than the bare unconstitutional action.

I now see the point you're making, and agree.

Offline PurpleOil

  • Combo-Fan
  • **
  • Posts: 771
  • Make it rain
    • View Profile
Re: Athletes Forcing Change
« Reply #264 on: June 30, 2020, 01:25:44 PM »
You would be incorrect. That phrase does not refer to disrupting someone's internal peace; it refers to a state of lawlessness that is considered dangerous. For example, let's say you're repossessing someone's tractor because you loaned them money to purchase the tractor and they defaulted on the loan. When you show up, the farmer is sitting on the tractor with a shotgun. You cannot then repossess the tractor without causing a breach of the peace, so you can no longer privately repossess it.
There's a practical element to this.  K-State can do whatever it wants.  There's very little (if anything) K-State can do to punish protected (i.e. racist) speech within the bounds of the constitution.

If K-State needs some pretext to boot this guy (or the next guy) off campus or otherwise punish him in any meaningful way, "breach of peace" is as good (and as bad) as any, imo.

No, K-State cannot do just whatever it wants. It's a state university. The state owns it, runs it, allots it money etc.  It is a state actor regardless of which way the political winds happen to be blowing. I forgot that part of the Constitution where it said, hey these rights we discussed, nevermind ... they don’t rough ridin' apply if a school has a code of conduct. Being expelled is punishment.  The First Amendment prevents state actors from retaliating against individuals for protected speech.  It isn't just limited to protection from being jailed.

The whole reason for the code of conduct change is so that students can be removed for similar comments in the future. This is setting up the university to be sued in multiple ways when the next racist bad person like this kid gets kicked out for similar statements/tweets/FB posts. I understand that it wasn't really a joke to him. I understand who he is and the groups he associates with. I also understand that as a grown adult, sometimes you have to just walk on by the trash.

This little punk's comment was horribly insensitive, specifically intended to rile people up, comes at a politically hostile time, and is not worth the time it takes to read.

Yet, here we are anyways.
Yes, K-State can.  If K-State wants to expel him or anyone like him, they can do it in the next ten minutes.  Whether, down the line, the guy sues and K-State gets told by some judge that they have to let him back in is another (and overwhelmingly likely) story.

I get how the first amendment and student speech works, but the practicalities of constitutional protections being enforced require more than the bare unconstitutional action.
well then my vote is find a reason to expel him and do it. if he gets a judge to let him back in then at least KSU has shown they did everything possible. i can't wait for the first report of him being seen on campus. i wonder if he will ever be on campus and if he is even from kansas?

This little crap has already garnered a larger platform than he could have ever dreamed. Why would we want to perpetuate this and end up in court, likely to lose? Just to prove we're not racists?

Offline michigancat

  • Contributor
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 42992
  • change your stupid avatar.
    • View Profile
Re: Athletes Forcing Change
« Reply #265 on: June 30, 2020, 01:30:52 PM »
This little crap has already garnered a larger platform than he could have ever dreamed. Why would we want to perpetuate this and end up in court, likely to lose? Just to prove we're not racists?

yeah and that's a pretty good reason

Offline steve dave

  • Global Moderator
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 72294
  • Romantic Fist Attachment
    • View Profile
Re: Athletes Forcing Change
« Reply #266 on: June 30, 2020, 01:41:32 PM »
imagine KSU of all schools coming out as clearly not racist in this, the year of our lord, 2020.

Offline NDB

  • Fan
  • *
  • Posts: 11
    • View Profile
Re: Athletes Forcing Change
« Reply #267 on: June 30, 2020, 03:25:22 PM »
You would be incorrect. That phrase does not refer to disrupting someone's internal peace; it refers to a state of lawlessness that is considered dangerous. For example, let's say you're repossessing someone's tractor because you loaned them money to purchase the tractor and they defaulted on the loan. When you show up, the farmer is sitting on the tractor with a shotgun. You cannot then repossess the tractor without causing a breach of the peace, so you can no longer privately repossess it.
There's a practical element to this.  K-State can do whatever it wants.  There's very little (if anything) K-State can do to punish protected (i.e. racist) speech within the bounds of the constitution.

If K-State needs some pretext to boot this guy (or the next guy) off campus or otherwise punish him in any meaningful way, "breach of peace" is as good (and as bad) as any, imo.

No, K-State cannot do just whatever it wants. It's a state university. The state owns it, runs it, allots it money etc.  It is a state actor regardless of which way the political winds happen to be blowing. I forgot that part of the Constitution where it said, hey these rights we discussed, nevermind ... they don’t rough ridin' apply if a school has a code of conduct. Being expelled is punishment.  The First Amendment prevents state actors from retaliating against individuals for protected speech.  It isn't just limited to protection from being jailed.

The whole reason for the code of conduct change is so that students can be removed for similar comments in the future. This is setting up the university to be sued in multiple ways when the next racist bad person like this kid gets kicked out for similar statements/tweets/FB posts. I understand that it wasn't really a joke to him. I understand who he is and the groups he associates with. I also understand that as a grown adult, sometimes you have to just walk on by the trash.

This little punk's comment was horribly insensitive, specifically intended to rile people up, comes at a politically hostile time, and is not worth the time it takes to read.

Yet, here we are anyways.
Yes, K-State can.  If K-State wants to expel him or anyone like him, they can do it in the next ten minutes.  Whether, down the line, the guy sues and K-State gets told by some judge that they have to let him back in is another (and overwhelmingly likely) story.

I get how the first amendment and student speech works, but the practicalities of constitutional protections being enforced require more than the bare unconstitutional action.

Yeah.  Just like a person can rob a bank or kill someone...

The kid would sue, he'd win, and the University would write a check for at least seven if not eight figures.

They'd be subject to punitive damages.  Just how big do think the damages would be so that the University would never do this again. 

This kid has already lawyered up and is waiting for the University to do something stupid.
« Last Edit: June 30, 2020, 03:32:49 PM by NDB »

Offline DQ12

  • PCKK7DC Survivor
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *******
  • Posts: 19778
  • #TeamChestHair
    • View Profile
Re: Athletes Forcing Change
« Reply #268 on: June 30, 2020, 03:36:58 PM »
You would be incorrect. That phrase does not refer to disrupting someone's internal peace; it refers to a state of lawlessness that is considered dangerous. For example, let's say you're repossessing someone's tractor because you loaned them money to purchase the tractor and they defaulted on the loan. When you show up, the farmer is sitting on the tractor with a shotgun. You cannot then repossess the tractor without causing a breach of the peace, so you can no longer privately repossess it.
There's a practical element to this.  K-State can do whatever it wants.  There's very little (if anything) K-State can do to punish protected (i.e. racist) speech within the bounds of the constitution.

If K-State needs some pretext to boot this guy (or the next guy) off campus or otherwise punish him in any meaningful way, "breach of peace" is as good (and as bad) as any, imo.

No, K-State cannot do just whatever it wants. It's a state university. The state owns it, runs it, allots it money etc.  It is a state actor regardless of which way the political winds happen to be blowing. I forgot that part of the Constitution where it said, hey these rights we discussed, nevermind ... they don’t rough ridin' apply if a school has a code of conduct. Being expelled is punishment.  The First Amendment prevents state actors from retaliating against individuals for protected speech.  It isn't just limited to protection from being jailed.

The whole reason for the code of conduct change is so that students can be removed for similar comments in the future. This is setting up the university to be sued in multiple ways when the next racist bad person like this kid gets kicked out for similar statements/tweets/FB posts. I understand that it wasn't really a joke to him. I understand who he is and the groups he associates with. I also understand that as a grown adult, sometimes you have to just walk on by the trash.

This little punk's comment was horribly insensitive, specifically intended to rile people up, comes at a politically hostile time, and is not worth the time it takes to read.

Yet, here we are anyways.
Yes, K-State can.  If K-State wants to expel him or anyone like him, they can do it in the next ten minutes.  Whether, down the line, the guy sues and K-State gets told by some judge that they have to let him back in is another (and overwhelmingly likely) story.

I get how the first amendment and student speech works, but the practicalities of constitutional protections being enforced require more than the bare unconstitutional action.

Yeah.  Just like a person can rob a bank or kill someone...

The kid would sue, he'd win, and the University would write a check for at least seven if not eight figures.

They'd be subject to punitive damages.  Just how big do think the damages would be so that the University would never do this again. 

This kid has already lawyered up and is waiting for the University to do something stupid.
I think punitives (or any damages beyond nominal) would be pretty unlikely.


"You want to stand next to someone and not be able to hear them, walk your ass into Manhattan, Kansas." - [REDACTED]

Offline I_have_purplewood

  • Katpak'r
  • ***
  • Posts: 1805
    • View Profile
Re: Athletes Forcing Change
« Reply #269 on: June 30, 2020, 03:47:32 PM »
Remember how bothered gE posters get when they'd see the "racist piece of crap" tag in their profile here?

KSU as a university can't brand a student that, but the community can.  Long before the tweet, EMAW's and MHK'rs should've been pointing the kid out everywhere he goes and announcing there goes the racist piece of crap.

I haven't paid attention to what year this kid is but not sure how he thinks he's going to get a job anywhere?  He's mumped for a long time to come.
Fifteen minutes later, when the Kansas locker room opened its doors to the media, the Jayhawks were still crying. Literally, bawling. All of them. I've never seen anything like it, and I've seen devastated college locker rooms -- after losses in the Final Four, the national championship game -- ever

Offline michigancat

  • Contributor
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 42992
  • change your stupid avatar.
    • View Profile
Re: Athletes Forcing Change
« Reply #270 on: June 30, 2020, 03:48:12 PM »
he has a future as a MAGA grifter

Offline star seed 7

  • hyperactive on the :lol:
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 53771
  • good dog
    • View Profile
Re: Athletes Forcing Change
« Reply #271 on: June 30, 2020, 03:48:51 PM »
Lol magas will keep him living comfortably bro
Hyperbolic partisan duplicitous hypocrite

Offline catastrophe

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 10078
    • View Profile
Re: Athletes Forcing Change
« Reply #272 on: June 30, 2020, 04:33:25 PM »
If you have no scruples it’s actually a very easy way to make a living.

Offline NDB

  • Fan
  • *
  • Posts: 11
    • View Profile
Re: Athletes Forcing Change
« Reply #273 on: June 30, 2020, 05:07:53 PM »
I think punitives (or any damages beyond nominal) would be pretty unlikely.

Happens all the time.

Offline DQ12

  • PCKK7DC Survivor
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *******
  • Posts: 19778
  • #TeamChestHair
    • View Profile
Re: Athletes Forcing Change
« Reply #274 on: June 30, 2020, 11:34:36 PM »
I think punitives (or any damages beyond nominal) would be pretty unlikely.

Happens all the time.
Link/cite?


"You want to stand next to someone and not be able to hear them, walk your ass into Manhattan, Kansas." - [REDACTED]