Staff Reports
Thirteen federal judges have taken a stand against Columbia University by declaring they will no longer hire law clerks from the prestigious institution. These judges, including notable names like Alan Albright and Matthew Kacsmaryk, cited concerns over student disruptions and the rise of antisemitism on Columbia’s campus as key reasons for their decision.
Appellate judges James Ho and Elizabeth Branch spearheaded this move after previous efforts to hold law students accountable for their actions at Stanford and Yale. They believe that students who do not uphold constitutional principles should face consequences and not be welcomed into the legal profession. This tough stance sends a clear message that intolerance and mob-like behavior will not be tolerated in the legal field.
#ltCDATAAntiSemitismgt #ltCDATAjudiciarygt Over a Dozen Federal Judges Say They Will No Longer Hire Law Clerks From Columbia https://t.co/ZLjz1wi7JR pic.twitter.com/nnhpskibFR
— AntiCorporatism.com (@CorporateState) May 7, 2024
The judges highlighted the importance of freedom of speech but emphasized that it should not be used as a shield for violence or threats. They accused Columbia of applying double standards when it comes to free speech and student misconduct, suggesting that the university has lost its ability to foster intellectual diversity and train future leaders in a pluralistic society.
This latest boycott against Columbia marks a shift in attitude for some judges who had previously criticized similar actions against other elite universities. The judiciary’s decision to take a stand against ideological homogeneity and intolerance is a bold move that underscores the importance of upholding constitutional values in academic environments.
In the face of growing concerns over student behavior and campus unrest, these federal judges are sending a powerful message that universities must prioritize intellectual diversity and respect for differing viewpoints. It is imperative for institutions of higher education to uphold free speech principles and foster an environment where civil discourse can thrive without fear of retribution or intolerance.
