UC Berkeley law professor denies free speech.

@Richard65 As I pointed out, the professor's home was used as a venue by the University to hold the dinner event for the graduating class. The professor was not the host. He was owner of the premises let to the university. He had no more rights than a restaurant owner whose establishment was used for the dinner. He could call the police if the students posed a danger to themselves and the property.

@sree251 then as owner of the premises he retains the right to decide what is said and how people act in his home or premises. He owns them. Would your church authorities allow satanists to exercise their right to free speech and hail the devil in that church, or would they act as the professor did? I think we know the answer.

@Richard65 You have got to think like a lawyer in reviewing this matter. The owner of the premises has let out his property to the university for the use of the students. The professor's house was no different from university property such as a dining hall or lecture theatre. A student could give an impromptu speech which was what happened. The professor was out of line.

@sree251 so let's think like a lawyer. An owner of the premises lets out his property to someone who then uses it to store illegal drugs. The owner of the property can still be held responsible for the stash of illegal drugs in his property. Even if he lets it out to a third party, he still retains authority over what happens in there. You let your house out to me and I use it to film a sex orgy. Do you retain the right to throw us all out? Yes you do.

@Richard65 [quote] An owner of the premises lets out his property to someone who then uses it to store illegal drugs. The owner of the property can still be held responsible for the stash of illegal drugs in his property. Even if he lets it out to a third party, he still retains authority over what happens in there. [/quote]

There is a lease, a contract between property owner and you, the lessor. If you use it for any purpose other than that stated in the lease, you have violated the agreement and liable for any criminal activity conducted in that property. Once the lease is signed, you have rights to use the property, and the owner of the property needs your permission to access that property for reasons stated in the lease.

@sree251 The report states: "Several dozen law school students were invited to the Oakland home of School of Law Dean Erwin Chemerinsky and his wife, law school professor Catherine Fisk, for the first of three dinners they planned to host. The event, which took place in the couple’s backyard garden with white-cloth-covered tables and students seated among lemon trees, was to recognize the work of law students and provide an opportunity to enjoy casual time with the two prominent professors."

you're talking about someone living at the property after signing a lease, with the professor acting as a landlord. In this instance, he simply hosted a dinner in HIS home to which graduates were invited. One graduate, a Palestinian American law student who was invited, stood up in front of guests and attempted to give a speech about Palestinians dying in Gaza. The professor lived there, it's HIS home, so he has a legal right to eject her from his property if he decides to do that. He's breaking no law, nor denying free speech.

@Richard65 [quote] you're talking about someone living at the property after signing a lease, with the professor acting as a landlord. In this instance, he simply hosted a dinner in HIS home to which graduates were invited. One graduate, a Palestinian American law student who was invited, stood up in front of guests and attempted to give a speech about Palestinians dying in Gaza. The professor lived there, it's HIS home, so he has a legal right to eject her from his property if he decides to do that. He's breaking no law, nor denying free speech. [/quote]

The UC Berkeley School of Law said in a statement Thursday that it paid for the dinner at the private residence, “as it does for all the student dinners.”

As such, it was a school function held at the professor's home. The students' dinners came out of their hefty tuition fees. Students were not invited at the pleasure of the professor. They were attending a law school event. The professor offered his home as the venue for a self-promoting reason. UC Berkeley is a top university that doesn't need the home of a faculty member for the dinner. The professor was not offering his home out of the goodness of his heart. He needs the students. The students don't need him.

@sree251 “I am appalled and deeply disturbed by what occurred at Dean Chemerinsky’s home last night,” UC Berkeley Chancellor Carol Christ said in a statement. “I have been in touch with him to offer my support and sympathy. While our support for free speech is unwavering, we cannot condone using a social occasion at a person’s private residence as a platform for protest.”

Berkeley fully supports his right to choose not to allow his home to be used for an unauthorised political protest, as that's not what the event was arranged for. So, if your argument relies on the fact Berkeley was hosting a law school event in which the professor effectively has no control, then even Berkeley disagrees with you. The occasion was to recognize the work of law students and provide an opportunity to enjoy casual time with the two prominent professors. Not to make a political protest.

@Richard65 [quote] Berkeley fully supports his right to choose not to allow his home to be used for an unauthorised political protest, as that's not what the event was arranged for. So, if your argument relies on the fact Berkeley was hosting a law school event in which the professor effectively has no control, then even Berkeley disagrees with you. The occasion was to recognize the work of law students and provide an opportunity to enjoy casual time with the two prominent professors. Not to make a political protest. [/quote]

The law professor doesn't know his rights, and neither does the Chancellor. And these are the people in authority teaching students. It's the same deal with public officials governing society and running the nation to the ground.

The student involved was using the dinner event to voice her feelings about a matter of public controversy: Gaza.

The student was a Muslim. The professor was a Jew. Instead of pouncing on and stopping her, the professor should have allowed her to have the floor. They were all graduating law students, and should have been treated like adults capable of listening to what she had to say.

@sree251 Was she interesrted in dialogue? Or did she merely want to create a viral hateful buzz?