Lauren Edelman quoted by Vox, Oct. 24, 2017
“[Harassment training] is often a veneer, or what I call symbolic compliance,” said Lauren Edelman, a professor of law and sociology at Berkeley Law. The problem, she continued, is that courts don’t distinguish between legal procedures that are a veneer and those that are actually effective.
Prasad Krishnamurthy quoted by California Magazine, Oct. 23, 2017
“It becomes a matter of evidence,” Krishnamurthy says. “To prove collusion, you have to prove that there was actual agreement among the owners not to hire him. It can’t be one guy simply saying, ‘I don’t think we’re going to hire him,’ and another guy saying, ‘Nope, me neither.’
Charles Denton and Charles Weisselberg quoted by The Daily Californian, Oct. 22, 2017
Although defendants representing themselves do not belong to the law profession, they are held to the same courtroom standards, Denton said. He added that, while the process is traumatic for the victim, the defense is less effective compared to attorney representation.
Charles Weisselberg … said that with self-representing defendants, cross-examination objectives remain the same with or without a representative lawyer — to “undermine the credibility of the witness or draw out points that would support the defense.”
Stephen Sugarman quoted by East Bay Times, Oct. 22, 2017
Intuitive may have settled cases it believed it could win in court, seeking to avoid negative publicity from a trial, Sugarman said. “On the other hand, it could be that they know they’re going to lose these cases, and what are they going to gain by trying to win?”
Lauren Edelman quoted by The Economist, Oct. 21, 2017
Young academics are at the mercy of star professors, whose goodwill and references they need when they start the hunt for a scarce permanent job. Universities may sack a junior staff member they find guilty of harassment, says Lauren Edelman. … But they often protect faculty members by paying off their accusers and insisting on non-disclosure agreements.
Erwin Chemerinsky quoted by Connecticut Law Tribune, Oct. 20, 2017
“Above all, we should be sure our actions comply with the First Amendment,” Chemerinsky said. “I have done all I can within the law school to do this.”
Lauren Edelman quoted by Newsweek, Oct. 19, 2017
Anti-harassment policies and procedures are just “symbolic compliance,” … Lauren Edelman tells Newsweek. “They’re meant to protect the company,” says Edelman. “The reason they’re created is because they’ve become widely accepted as indicative that the company cares about stopping harassment even when they don’t.”
Catherine Fisk quoted by Los Angeles Times, Oct. 19, 2017
“There are a lot of times where employers conclude that it’s worth running the risk of being sued in order to save quite a bit of money,” she said.
Christopher Hoofnagle quoted by NPR, WABE-FM, Oct. 18, 2017
Currently, he says, “every second of your existence someone can come along and pretend to be you, get your consumer report, and get a new credit card or an auto loan in your name.” Hoofnagle says your credit report should be frozen by default and then you could unfreeze it to, say, buy a car.
Erwin Chemerinsky co-writes for The Chronicle of Higher Education, Oct. 17, 2017
Accommodation is much less appropriate when some members of the campus are attempting to prevent others from exercising their rights. In such cases, heckler’s veto principles argue in favor of strong campus rebuffs of the claims of the disrupters. Otherwise, vulnerable or controversial opinions will never be expressible on a campus. And that would represent an abandonment of foundational principles of modern American higher education. Simply put, the right to speak does not include a right to use speech to keep others from speaking.