Wednesday, October 10, 2012

"Truth Telling" Will Come To Legal Center's Event

You may remember my post from last week about how the Legal Center to Prevent Gun Violence (sic) did not want to hear any thing other than the party line at their event "Truth Telling: The Media’s Role in the Conversation on Guns". They had sent a ticket refund to CalGuns Foundation director Josh Berger saying his presence at their event wasn't "appropriate" even though it was being held on the campus of a state-owned law school.

My, my, my, what a difference a week makes.

Elise K. Traynum, General Counsel and Secretary to the Board of Directors at UC Hasting College of Law, has sent Josh a letter informing him that if the event is held on their campus, he must be allowed to attend.

Dear Mr. Berger,

In addition to the UC Hastings’ nondiscrimination policies, the College has a longstanding commitment to a culture of free and open inquiry, spirited debate, and the exploration of diverse ideas. We believe in the  fundamental right and responsibility to foster and protect rational discourse in an environment marked both by the rigorous challenge of ideas and by tolerance for the expression of multiple viewpoints.

This afternoon I informed Ms. Thomas, the Executive Director of the Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence, that you must be allowed to attend the October 25 event if it is held on the College campus.    

Thank you for your correspondence. 

Elise Traynum

General Counsel and Secretary to the Board of Directors
University of California
Hastings College of the Law
198 McAllister Street
San Francisco, California

The ball is now in the Law Center's court. Do they move the event or do they allow their delicate ears to hear opposing voices? Decisions, decisions.

I'm happy to see that Hastings College of Law did the proper thing even though, to be honest, they didn't have much choice given that they are a state supported school.

1 comment:

  1. I'm interested to see how this turns out. Can they let him attend as a guest/non-speaker? If so, they could just refuse to let him ask questions or make comments.