Ethics Heroes: 13 Federal Judges

/ Jack Marshall / 17 Comments

Thirteen federal judges—appellate Judges James Ho and Elizabeth Branch, Matthew Solomson of the U.S Court of Federal Claims, District Judges Alan Albright and Matthew Kacsmaryk, Stephen Vaden, who sits on the United States Court of International Trade; plus judges David Counts, James W. Hendrix, Jeremy D. Kernodle, Tilman E. Self, III, Brantley Starr, Drew B. Tipton and Daniel M. Traynor—have all announced in a letter to Columbia University’s president, that beginning with the entering class of 2024, they “will not hire anyone who joins the Columbia University community—whether as undergraduates or law students.”

“Since the October 7 terrorist attacks by Hamas, Columbia University has become ground zero for the explosion of student disruptions, anti-semitism, and hatred for diverse viewpoints on campuses across the Nation, ” the letter begins. “Disruptors have threatened violence, committed assaults, and destroyed property. As judges who hire law clerks every year to serve in the federal judiciary, we have lost confidence in Columbia as an institution of higher education. Columbia has instead become an incubator of bigotry. As a result, Columbia has disqualified itself from educating the future leaders of our country.”

After suggesting measures that need to be taken to restore trust in the institution, the judges conclude, “Recent events demonstrate that ideological homogeneity throughout the entire institution of Columbia has destroyed its ability to train future leaders of a pluralistic and intellectually diverse country. Both professors and administrators are on the front lines of the campus disruptions, encouraging the virulent spread of antisemitism and bigotry. Significant and dramatic change in the composition of its faculty and administration is required to restore confidence in Columbia.”

It is a responsible, powerful, and much needed response, both to the institution and the students who have demonstrated both an absence of critical thinking and judicious temperament as well basic respect for their fellow students, liberal education, and the law.

Now do Harvard.


The New York Times’ Executive Editor Admits That His Paper “Went Too Far” Slanting Its News Reporting in 2020

/ Jack Marshall / 7 Comments

(But claims by Donald Trump that the election was “rigged” are “baseless” and supported by no evidence at all….).

Ben Smith, the former media columnist for the New York Times, is hardly an unbiased interviewer when it comes to his old employer. He’s a product of the Times culture, and the Times culture is, has been and continues to be corrupted and unethical. The message of his recent interview with newish executive editor Joe Kahn is that the Times is all better now and is objective again after a teeny dip, though it hasn’t been objective in my lifetime.

What is revealing about the interview, however, is that if one can wade through the doubletalk, careful caveats, avoidance of direct statements and verbosity, Kahn admits that the Times was in the tank for Biden and the Democrats in 2020 as the pandemic and Black Lives Matter hit, and that it was wrong for the Times to do that, and they are really, really sorry and promise not to do it again.

Strangely, the Times has not apologized to Donald Trump, Republicans, the American voters and the Founders for this. His statement also puts in perspective the rote talking point, every time the news media sneeringly refers to Trump’s insistence that the election was stolen from him, that the claim is “baseless.” That the leader of the U.S. news media still regarded as the role model for the rest deliberately abandoned its already partisan-biased version of journalism for pure advocacy and propaganda in the year of a national election is very much a “base.” Ethics Alarms, among others, has said so, and was saying so in 2020. Remember those scary (and fake) Hunan virus death charts with red spikes reaching through and above the mast head? Yeah, I think we got a little carried away, says Kahn.

Oh, well that’s okay then. Everybody makes mistakes….

The man is, in order, as expert at avoiding speaking plainly as any politician, infuriatingly equivocal, blatantly partisan, and a master of spin. Nonetheless, if you can pick your way through all the fog, the confession is there. Here are some key sections with some commentary by me):

  • Ben Smith: “Dan Pfeiffer, who used to work for Barack Obama, recently wrote of the Times: “They do not see their job as saving democracy or stopping an authoritarian from taking power.” Why don’t you see your job as: “We’ve got to stop Trump?” What about your job doesn’t let you think that way?”

    Joe Kahn: “Good media is the Fourth Estate, it’s another pillar of democracy. One of the absolute necessities of democracy is having a free and fair and open election where people can compete for votes, and the role of the news media in that environment is not to skew your coverage towards one candidate or the other, but just to provide very good, hard-hitting, well-rounded coverage of both candidates, and informing voters. If you believe in democracy, I don’t see how we get past the essential role of quality media in informing people about their choice in a presidential election. To say that the threats of democracy are so great that the media is going to abandon its central role as a source of impartial information to help people vote — that’s essentially saying that the news media should become a propaganda arm for a single candidate, because we prefer that candidate’s agenda. It is true that Biden’s agenda is more in sync with traditional establishment parties and candidates. And we’re reporting on that and making it very clear. It’s also true that Trump could win this election in a popular vote. Given that Trump’s not in office, it will probably be fair. And there’s a very good chance, based on our polling and other independent polling, that he will win that election in a popular vote. So there are people out there in the world who may decide, based on their democratic rights, to elect Donald Trump as president. It is not the job of the news media to prevent that from happening. It’s the job of Biden and the people around Biden to prevent that from happening. It’s our job to cover the full range of issues that people have. At the moment, democracy is one of them. But it’s not the top one.”

Continue reading →

The Latest From Harvard Is So Irresponsible and Incompetent That It Shocks Even Me

/ Jack Marshall / 15 Comments

And I have absolutely no faith or trust in this arrogant and rotting (a bad combination) institution. But I still didn’t think its leadership could be this stupid. Hence my brains and skull fragments being all over the ceiling…

Harvard’s 2024 commencement speaker will be Maria Ressa, the CEO of the Philippines-based news site Rappler and a Nobel Peace Prize laureate. Sounds Harvard-y eneough, doesn’t she? Except that in January, Ressa signed a letter accusing Israel of “unabated killing of journalists in Israeli airstrikes since the start of the Israel-Gaza war”while calling for “immediate end to the bombardment of journalists and apparent targeting in some cases of our colleagues in Gaza and the region.” (This a dubious accusation at best.)

Continue reading →

Comment of the Day: “Fat-Shaming Ethics”

/ Jack Marshall / 14 Comments

I have such a strong visceral reaction to this provocative Comment of the Day, a personal account by Joel Mundt, that I’m going to eschew my usual introduction and let you make your own judgments without any influence by me. Here it is, in reaction to “Fat-Shaming Ethics” and the lively comments it has generated so far…

***

I’m going slightly off-topic, and I apologize in advance…

I’m of the opinion that shaming is, to a degree, a good thing. In my opinion, it’s a form of non-physical discipline that emphasizes embarrassment and plays on an individual’s need to be liked and to be more like the collective. It’s a way to manipulate desired behavior using something of a “group intervention.”

A perfect example of this is…well…me. As an elementary student, I had a reputation of being really smart, but also talking out-of-turn an awful lot in class, which was disruptive. My 5th-grade teacher, Mrs. Crooks, sought me out and purposely got my name on her class list. Nobody wanted her as their 5th-grade teacher…she had a terrifying reputation among younger students. I didn’t know it until years later, but she had talked to my parents ahead of time, explaining that I would be her student, and she would break me of my disruptive ways.

And she did her best! I was punished in the most imaginative ways for speaking out of turn, like being ordered to walk around classroom without making a sound for 10 minutes while she taught the other students, or playing the part of the “silent i” in front of the class when learning to spell words like “receive”. She was modestly effective…until the day of “the sign”. I was talking out of turn yet again and Mrs. Crooks told me – in front of the class – that my punishment was to write the words “I’m a big mouth” on a piece of paper, then glue it to a piece of cardboard she gave me with a string in it, then wear it around my neck…outside during our lunch recess with the entire school.

Continue reading →

RFK Jr. Supporters Are Going To Sue Meta (Facebook, Instagram). Good!

/ Jack Marshall / 8 Comments

Oopsie! Meta, the monster (in many senses of the word) parent company of social media giants Facebook and Instagram, blocked the link to a new, 30-minute infomercial supporting the candidacy of Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., the rebel independent Presidential candidate whom Democrats wish they could vaporize with their bad thoughts. Meta says it was a “mistake.”

Maybe it was. The embargo didn’t last long: the ad was only unavailable from late afternoon last Friday to the middle of last Saturday. A spokesman for Meta said the link had been incorrectly flagged as spam. For some reason, RFK Jr.’s campaign and supporters don’t trust Meta. Tony Lyons, a founder the super PAC that paid for the ad, says his group plans to sue Meta in federal court for censorship and First Amendment violations.

“When social media companies censor a presidential candidate, the public can’t learn what that candidate actually believes and what policies they would pursue if elected,” Mr. Lyons said. “We are left with the propaganda and lies from the most powerful and most corrupt groups and individuals.”

Continue reading →

Unethical Quote of the Week: The Columbia Law Review

/ Jack Marshall / 9 Comments

I gave a legal ethics seminar 90 minutes after finding my wife dead, and these infants are too traumatized to take their exams because of a “horrific time on campus” and their “level of distress”:

Continue reading →

Awkward Situation Ethics

/ Jack Marshall / 17 Comments

I am beginning to think that I have been magically trapped in a “Mr. Bean” episode.

First I drive 30 miles for an appointment with my accountant, and he forgets about it. Then I am invited to lunch at a law firm, and when I arrive, the office is deserted, with computers on and lights blazing. The next week, I do a live/Zoom seminar that is going swimmingly when the whole system breaks down, leaving me soundless and video-less.

Yesterday, a neighbor invites me to “a little neighborhood gathering” celebrating Cinco de Mayo (it’s Greek Easter among my relatives) between 1 and 3 today. There will be food, I am told. I have not been invited to any neighborhood social gathering for at least ten years, so I resolve to show up, though that’s Spuds walking time and the Red Sox are playing the Twins.

I intended to drop by just to be neighborly and appreciative around 1:30, but I get a phone call from an old friend offering condolences, and I don’t reach the neighbor’s place until 2:30. When I come in the door, I see that everyone is listening to a presentation about…solar panels. I don’t know anyone, and no one is talking except the solar panel pitch man. I see a table with food, and I’m starving, but it’s in the middle of the room with the solar panel lecture. This goes on for 15 minutes, as I stand near the door watching the pitch for something holding no interest for me. Solar panels are a Cinco de Mayo thing, I surmise. Good to know. My hostess left me shortly after letting me in the door and got involved in the solar panel-fest. Spuds was waiting for a walk, the baseball game has started, and I was hungry.

The neighbor’s young son came in the door from playing outside, and I went out of it. I walked back home.

Was that wrong?

Fat-Shaming Ethics

/ Jack Marshall / 41 Comments

An issue that arose on this post, about the Governor and First Lady of Illinois releasing what has been described as a “cringey” “Star Wars” Day photo of the two dressed as Luke Skywalker and his sister Leia. I knew someone would accuse me of “fat-shaming” when I wrote that they looked like Luke and Leia has been attacked by the Empire’s “fat ray.” I know what fat-shaming is, and that’s not it. Since there seems to be some confusion on the issue, however, I will take this opportunity to clarify.

Fat-shaming, properly used, refers to the criticism of an individual’s weight and appearance to no other end for no other reason than to attack the individual. Ethics Alarms has consistently condemned this practice regardless of who the targets have been: Al Gore, Donald Trump, Hillary Clinton, Ted Kennedy and Rush Limbaugh are some I remember without checking. There may be others. I have a lot of posts here and have my weak moments: I might have made fun of someone based on their weight, but I don’t think so.

The first time I remember being aware of criticism being leveled at a public figure for his or her weight was when the film “Cleopatra” was released in the midst of all the stories about the on-set romance between Richard Burton and Eddie Fisher’s then wife Elizabeth Taylor. Movie critics hated the film as well as Taylor’s performance, and she was especially singled out as being overweight for the role of Cleopatra. (Today she would be criticized for being too white.)

Continue reading →

Progressives Have Settled On the Defenses For Their Indoctrinated College Students Supporting Terrorism and Acting Like Nazis…[Bad Link Fixed]

/ Jack Marshall / 11 Comments

They are not persuasive. In fact, both are desperate, dishonest and predictable.

Defense #1 is, of course, “It isn’t what it is,” Rationalization #64 and the mantra of the 21st century Left when their delusions, plans, policies and plots blow up in their faces likeone of the Coyote’s bombs intended for the Road Runner. There’s nothing anti-Semitic about supporting Hamas after the October 7 terrorist attack on Israeli civilians! There’s no reason for Jewish students to feel threatened and unwelcome on their own campus when masked protesters wearing the garb of a group that has pledged to eliminate Israel march and chant “From the river to the sea..” And heck, that ditty is completely innocent, like “Mary had a little lamb…” It doesn’t necessary mean “we’re going to wipe you Jews off the map.” You know, just like “Pigs in a blanket, fry ’em like bacon” was just epicurean commentary. Besides, calling out lies about Jews (there is and has been no genocide; there is no apartheid, and there is no such thing as a “disproportional response” when a neighboring region starts a war with a surprise attack on a nation’s citizens and children) and verbally threatening them is just free speech. After all, these aren’t “true threats”—it’s not like anyone would ever actually try to do anything harmful to someone just because they are Jewish. That’s never happened. These demonstrations are just like all those campus marches with students wearing hoods and sheets, chanting “Back to Africa!” and carrying burning…okay, okay, those haven’t happened. And they would be different.

Defense #2 is “Conservatives made them do it.”

I could devote this whole website to featuring and debunking the increasingly hysterical, wildly dishonest, furiously contrived arguments of progressive pundits as they feel the metaphorical walls closing in this year. It’s tempting: I’ve written about a few, but their efforts to somehow separate themselves and their fellow travelers from the outbreak of antisemitism on campuses while simultaneously avoiding the simple statement: “This is wrong” along with the more difficult “And we’re substantially responsible” should be self-indicting.

Continue reading →

Ethics Quiz: Elected Officials Acting In An Undignified Manner

/ Jack Marshall / 18 Comments

I had to post an ethics quiz on this, especially after beginning the day writing, “I’d say anyone celebrating Star Wars Day today (“May the Fourth be with you!”) on this May 4 needs to get out more. In addition to being a day that promises further depressing developments on college campuses as the decades of progressive, anti-American, and Marxist indoctrination have their predictable (and probably intentional) consequences—though somehow the ivory tower revolutionaries in charge of those campuses were oddly unprepared for them!—this date has an ominous history.”

And there he is, J.B. Pritzker, the Governor of Illinois, posing with his wife on social media to celebrate “Star Wars” in a pose apparently evoking a yet-to-be released “Star Wars” sequel in which Luke and Leia are victims of the Empire’s diabolical fat ray.

Your Ethics Alarms Ethics Quiz of the Day is…

Is it responsible for high-ranking elected officials to present themselves to the public looking and acting ridiculous?

Continue reading →