Posted on 04/22/2023 5:50:29 AM PDT by CFW
“For questioning Covid restrictions, Georgetown Law suspended me from campus, forced me to undergo a psychiatric evaluation, required me to waive my right to medical confidentiality, and threatened to report me to state bar associations.”
That’s how William Spruance sums up what he faced at Georgetown Law School in 2021 after he asked a few simple questions critical of the school’s Covid policies, which at the time included mandatory vaccines, masks — and outlawing students from sipping from bottled water in classrooms.
Spruance had also been “identified as non-compliant” for “letting the mask fall beneath [his] nose,” according to a notice he received from Georgetown Law’s compliance division.
Spruance, now graduated and a practicing attorney, said he is speaking out about his ordeal because he has something of a moral obligation to do so.
(Excerpt) Read more at thecollegefix.com ...
“... and outlawing students from sipping from bottled water in classrooms.”
Remember when we all survived our school days without sucking on a bottle all the time?
Aside from this, I agree that the law school’s policies were dictatorial and I hope the young man does well in life.
WWII ended almost 80 years ago. But there are still Nazi hunters making sure that evil people are brought to justice, wherever possible.
We need to take that approach with the vaccine and the COVID policy. It may take some years before the majority of people really grasp how much damage has really been done by these evil people, but once the realization kicks in, we need to spend the next 80 years hunting these people down and making them pay for their crimes. Never forget.
Yup. If you were choking and dying, you might, miiiight, be allowed to go to the water fountain, otherwise you had to wait for lunch break or recess.
Ridiculous, right?
when are disability organizations gonna start filing lawsuits and complaints against states and business that forced customers to stand outside in the heat without seating or shelter for those with disabilities? and forcing asthmatics and people with respiratory problems to wear masks even though everybody knew they didn’t work? this is blatant noncompliance with the ADA and should be a slam dunk
when are disability organizations gonna start filing lawsuits and complaints against states and business that forced customers to stand outside in the heat without seating or shelter for those with disabilities? and forcing asthmatics and people with respiratory problems to wear masks even though everybody knew they didn’t work? this is blatant noncompliance with the ADA and should be a slam dunk
Whomever transcribed Mr. Spruance's words should be ashamed.
The lack of writing skills, and absence of editing just shows that evolution must be true, and we are dissented from apes.
I am sure there were many students who were 100% on board with these policies and gleefully “Helped” enforce them.
And without communicating with our parents all day. Incredible!
And then you drank from a source that hundreds of other people and their germs had used, and that didn't have any special flavorings or nutrients in it ... and you didn't die.
When I read this article, this attorney has approached things the proper way through questioning and logic. I think he has a valid complaint and perhaps lawsuit with relief both administrative and financial and would be interesting to see in front of a jury. The only argument I have is that descent is spelled dissent in the article
All that being said you make some accusations I generally ask about and very rarely get an answer that is on point. So I will try again.
1. You state evil people should be hunted down and punished for their crimes. Notwithstanding you suggest hunting down someone and punishing them, perhaps you should advocate they be tried for their alleged crimes — what crimes have been committed? What elements of the crime are present that would lead to trial. What is the probable cause to investigate these crimes
2. You reference evil people. There is a difference between evil and criminal. One is a moral perspective one is a structural and process perspective. What people are evil? Why are they evil? Is evil simply something you disagree with or are there characteristics that are universally apparent?
3. What steps would you advocate to take? Are those steps able to be reconciled with the United States Constitution? How so?
Many people here state the things you have said but fail to back it up wotj the required analysis. A crime is something that is breaking a law with the mens rea to commit the act with intent of also must be judged at the moment of the action. Not retrospectively. For example, Lincoln suspended Habeas Corpus emergentoy at the time of the civil war and yet was never charged of a crime.
No one has provided the first basis for the hyperbolic claims. I am just curious what you think (or anyone else with the same perspective) may think is the factual basis of these claims? I am rather hoping that someone with the screen name clear case can indeed make that clear case.
Well played.
That’s nothing…the law school from which I graduated in 1985, now brings in emotional support dogs during the two weeks of finals so the emotionally weak students can survive finals. It just infuriates me. When I was in law school, it was designed to make you tough and thick skinned so you could handle bully judges. Now they cater to every weak, emotional cripple. Young lawyers today are just snot nosed babies. They get butt hurt over everything. Back in the day, we would go in the courtroom, fight like dogs, call each other names and then go to lunch together and laugh about it. Not anymore. Not near as much fun as it used to be. Woke has destroyed everything it touches.
Lincoln suspended Habeas Corpus emergentoy at the time of the civil war and yet was never charged of a crime.
*************************************************
And yet Lincoln was assassinated by ... (someone, JW Booth maybe?).
Kind of weird too. Someone “hunted down” Lincoln.
BTW Prof GasSucker - you are trying to advance/further this “emergency” notion as justification for disregarding the Constitution. This is very disingenuous of you.
OTOH - I think you are consistent in your resistance to the facts, and your insistence on flimsy and unsupported claims from pseudo-scientists.
Yeah, forgot about that. But everybody is sucking on a pacifier water bottle nowadays now that you mention in. Back in the day people took care of business and drinking between classes, meetings and such. Wonder what the change is? More instant gratification generation?
Yes. Kind of pathetic that a ‘student reporter’ newspaper makes a mistake like that. This may explain, to some extent, why we have the ‘news’ people we do.
I think a couple of things happened. First, it became widely acknowledged that drinking water (or an electrolyte replacement beverage) is pretty important if you’re working hard or doing strenuous exercise for long periods of time, especially when it’s hot.
Second, people who were just sitting around told themselves, “I’m working hard, too!” and said they needed to “stay hydrated,” just like roofing workers in July in Florida.
And nobody wants to be the one to tell a child, “You’re fine, just get back to work,” at any point, because the only the only thing that’s wrong anymore is not being “empathetic” regarding whatever whininess someone comes up with.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.