DougBH:
The government is simply requiring an institution to provide records needed to determine if its foreign students are complying with their visas. If the institution can’t do that, they can’t support visas.
Of course the petitioners knew exactly which judge to go to to get their nationwide ban.
Expect an expedited appeal reaching the Supreme Court.
My guess…at some point the Supreme Court is going to get tired of this forum shopping for nationwide injunctions.
Stop
the government isn’t don’t it at any other school where the protests happened. Stop.
Right so they went after a George w bush appointed judge in a Federal system that assigns cases round robin
I keep telling you this in thread after thread. Judge shopping is impossible in the federal system. However venue shopping is a thing
I have no problem with there not being nationwide injunctions.
DougBH
May 23, 2025, 3:14pm
42
The attorneys know exactly which judge to go to. You don’t think they know there are other judges they could go to who would kick them out the door?
They cannot go to a judge in the federal system.
Cases are assigned round robin
This isn’t a police procedural tv show. In real life they can only venue shop
Camp
May 23, 2025, 3:16pm
44
Otherwise what point is having an election for?
1 Like
This isn’t a good thing. Not all graduate level studies are in gender studies. A lot of them are in finance
This is my favoritest argument that the White House has been pushing.
DougBH
May 23, 2025, 3:17pm
47
Why the heck is a Harvard case being decided in Northern California, other than that plaintiffs think they can do better there?
Good question. What was the reason the attorneys gave?
Camp
May 23, 2025, 3:17pm
49
I know this has been the case for a couple decades.
In engineering no less.
1 Like
DougBH
May 23, 2025, 3:19pm
50
They said the ninth circuit and Northern California was full of leftists who hated trump and would do anything they had to,to,stop or delay him. (I assume. I haven’t really seen their petition)
1 Like
Camp
May 23, 2025, 3:19pm
51
Its true. Policy is by vote.
I do think that THIS action on Harvard is too far.
The funding cuts are appropriate.
1 Like
Cool. What was the reason they actually gave?
Camp:
Its true. Policy is by vote.
I do think that THIS action on Harvard is too far.
The funding cuts are appropriate.
It’s not. Policy has to be within constitutional limits. You may disagree with the argument that it is unconstitutional to begin with. That’s fine but it is still subject to adjudication.
I am glad but why are the fund cuts appropriate?
DougBH
May 23, 2025, 3:21pm
54
Camp:
Its true. Policy is by vote.
I do think that THIS action on Harvard is too far.
The funding cuts are appropriate.
Harvard has the option to solve this whole visa issue by providing the requested student records. Their refusal to comply is going to far.
What about all the other schools? What toner schools were asked?
Comply with the Feds or else.
I am sure you were on board with Bidens vaccine mandates and subsequent job losses based on failure to abide by the mandate
Camp
May 23, 2025, 3:23pm
56
That is why I think this one is too far. Harvard specific.
I concur that the policy must be Constitutional.
1 Like
DougBH
May 23, 2025, 3:23pm
57
You will have to ask the administration about that…if you even think it is relevant.
Like illegal aliens, they can’t all be handled at once.
Segregation wasn’t ended in all southern schools over night.
Guvnah
May 23, 2025, 3:24pm
58
It’s a fair question.
As the saying goes, the nail that sticks out gets hammered.
1 Like
DougBH
May 23, 2025, 3:25pm
59
Governor Faubus probably asked that about Little Rock in 1957.