"Turning out the future lawyers of America"
Hat tip to American Power
My friend Donald Douglas at American Power has picked up and posted the story of a conservative woman who is alleging bias at the University of Iowa Law School for refusing to hire her. Looks like she may have a case.
http://americanpowerblog.blogspot.com/2012/01/lisa-wagners-lawsuit-against-university.html
This is hardly an isolated problem. University law schools are chock full of professors who teach the "progressive" point of view. If the lady in question is indeed an activist, then so are so many of the liberal professors. Why not have a little diversity, as they always say. Of course, I am talking about philosophical diversity.
3 comments:
Oh, there is enough controversy to go to trial. But if I were on the jury, I would want to know, e.g., whether she was going to teach all the reasons the Supreme Court was boneheadedly wrong in deciding Roe v. Wade, or whether she would meticulously present the arguments offered by attorneys for each side, trace the precedents relied upon by the court in sorting out those arguments, and then assign students to write their own brief to
a) defend the court's decision
b) make an argument to overrule it
c) point out strengths and weaknesses while offering an more solid legal disposition.
Right-wingers can be just as ideological in the classroom as left-wingers. In fact, I even worry about ideological moderates pouring a pre-set viewpoint down students' throats.
The point of difference is the Constitution.
No Gary, the point of difference is NOT the Constitution.
The Constitution is a jurisdictional document. People of every ideological viewpoint facilely TRY to use the Constitution to advance whatever it is they want the law to be -- which is inevitable in an adversary system of justice.
Judges are supposed to look at the arguments posed by each litigant, then consult what the Constitution actually says, and rule accordingly. The court just did so, for example, in the decision about the Lutheran school that was sued by a teacher for employment discrimination. First amendment trumps EEOC.
Assuming the courts DO manage to get what the constitution actually says correctly, the "liberals" and the "conservatives" (depending on who lost) go off whining that the court doesn't understand the constitution, because "I didn't get what I want."
Nothing you have offered tells us whether this mad woman is capable of teaching the constitution AS constitution, as distinct from cramming her own ideology down her students' throats.
Post a Comment