Comments on: FIRE Responds Regarding Condemnation vs. Censorship http://www.popehat.com/2008/04/15/fire-responds-regarding-condemnation-vs-censorship/ A Group Complaint about Law, Liberty, and Leisure Thu, 09 Feb 2012 22:39:39 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Jesse http://www.popehat.com/2008/04/15/fire-responds-regarding-condemnation-vs-censorship/comment-page-1/#comment-2603 Jesse Tue, 15 Apr 2008 22:37:42 +0000 http://www.newpopehat.dreamhosters.com/?p=739#comment-2603 Damn it. As an alum of the Colorado College, I now feel like I have to write a letter to my retarded dean .... Damn it. As an alum of the Colorado College, I now feel like I have to write a letter to my retarded dean ….

]]> By: Patrick http://www.popehat.com/2008/04/15/fire-responds-regarding-condemnation-vs-censorship/comment-page-1/#comment-2602 Patrick Tue, 15 Apr 2008 22:21:48 +0000 http://www.newpopehat.dreamhosters.com/?p=739#comment-2602 Well Ken, in that event, let's suppose this had been a federal agency placing a reprimand in an employee's file concerning the employee's publication of matters unrelated to his employment, a reprimand which would be seen by other federal agencies reviewing the file for determination of whether to hire this person. Let's suppose the employee had published this silly newspaper on his own time, and it wound up in his file in a form accessible to other government agencies without considering federal privacy laws. Let's suppose, when you were an AUSA, that Justice had reprimanded you and made the reprimand accessible to other agencies looking to hire you over something you'd written on this blog that had nothing to do with your job. Whaddya think, hoss? Assuming you <em>really</em> wanted to transfer to another agency, would that be a problem for you? And by problem, I mean litigation. Well Ken, in that event, let's suppose this had been a federal agency placing a reprimand in an employee's file concerning the employee's publication of matters unrelated to his employment, a reprimand which would be seen by other federal agencies reviewing the file for determination of whether to hire this person. Let's suppose the employee had published this silly newspaper on his own time, and it wound up in his file in a form accessible to other government agencies without considering federal privacy laws. Let's suppose, when you were an AUSA, that Justice had reprimanded you and made the reprimand accessible to other agencies looking to hire you over something you'd written on this blog that had nothing to do with your job.

Whaddya think, hoss? Assuming you really wanted to transfer to another agency, would that be a problem for you? And by problem, I mean litigation.

]]> By: Ken http://www.popehat.com/2008/04/15/fire-responds-regarding-condemnation-vs-censorship/comment-page-1/#comment-2600 Ken Tue, 15 Apr 2008 22:11:17 +0000 http://www.newpopehat.dreamhosters.com/?p=739#comment-2600 I know you understand state action and do not think this instance is legally cognizable. But since we were analyzing Colorado College's asshattery <i>as if</i> it were governed by the First Amendment --- on the theory that universities should try to meet that standard, and be called out when they do not -- I understood you to be suggesting before that <i>if</i> a state actor did this it should be considered legally cognizable punishment. My apologies if I got it wrong. I know you understand state action and do not think this instance is legally cognizable. But since we were analyzing Colorado College's asshattery as if it were governed by the First Amendment — on the theory that universities should try to meet that standard, and be called out when they do not — I understood you to be suggesting before that if a state actor did this it should be considered legally cognizable punishment. My apologies if I got it wrong.

]]> By: Patrick http://www.popehat.com/2008/04/15/fire-responds-regarding-condemnation-vs-censorship/comment-page-1/#comment-2598 Patrick Tue, 15 Apr 2008 22:05:24 +0000 http://www.newpopehat.dreamhosters.com/?p=739#comment-2598 Ken as you know I don't feel this to be a legally cognizable anything. I merely think it's morally wrong. Mr. Bader may feel it to be something worthy of litigation, but I don't. I don't say that to disparage or disagree with you, but simply because I'm afraid that the one or two lawyers of personal acquaintance who read this blog might take away the impression that I believe a private university's asshattery is a violation of the First Amendment. Ken as you know I don't feel this to be a legally cognizable anything. I merely think it's morally wrong. Mr. Bader may feel it to be something worthy of litigation, but I don't.

I don't say that to disparage or disagree with you, but simply because I'm afraid that the one or two lawyers of personal acquaintance who read this blog might take away the impression that I believe a private university's asshattery is a violation of the First Amendment.

]]> By: Condemnation is Not Censorship: The FIRE Gets it Wrong on Colorado College, The Monthly Bag, and Official Criticism | Popehat http://www.popehat.com/2008/04/15/fire-responds-regarding-condemnation-vs-censorship/comment-page-1/#comment-2597 Condemnation is Not Censorship: The FIRE Gets it Wrong on Colorado College, The Monthly Bag, and Official Criticism | Popehat Tue, 15 Apr 2008 21:55:40 +0000 http://www.newpopehat.dreamhosters.com/?p=739#comment-2597 [...] Update: Mr. Kissel has responded at The FIRE’s blog, as discussed here. [...] [...] Update: Mr. Kissel has responded at The FIRE's blog, as discussed here. [...]

]]>