“California state law prohibits this sort of punishment of speech even by private colleges”
I doubt it would make any difference if its in Ca. Private colleges do “holistic” admissions that take one’s character into account. In Harvard case it only cited the rescission was made under various conditions including “if you engaged in behavior that brings into question your honesty, maturity or moral character.”
“Well, stating that comments were made “years ago” when you’re a 17-year-old applying for colleges and you were 16 when you made the comments, doesn’t really feel like a strong defense.”
Exactly. It was 18 months ago, not years.
once again, the dangers of any social media specially for kids - it’s really a Panopticon society now
It’s interesting to see the actual correspondence from Harvard that he tweeted.
Short and to the point. Smart, IMO, from legal and other angles. But, really, what more needs to be said other than, your acceptance has been rescinded.
I worked with some of those meme-rescinded students in 2017. My clients’ actions were a lot less worrisome than these, IMHO. I thought that those rescissions were harsh in light of the misdeeds, though I respected Harvard’s right to make that judgment. I was worried that Harvard’s freshman overenrollment that year was playing some role in its decision to mete out the strongest punishment it had to the entire group. I’m still skeptical about that.
In light of all that, this set of facts adds up to an easy call. Of course this student isn’t right for Harvard, at least not now. I always hold out hope that young people can learn to be better and do better. A liberal arts education is the best anti-bigotry weapon we’ve got, and there are plenty of places to get one besides Harvard.
Someone on the waitlist is very happy!!
That makes 2 of us.
However, in light of the precedent, this recent rescission of admission was a no-brainer IMO.
Another phony, “That’s not who I am” apology. And they are always sorry after they’ve been exposed.
@Hanna I know you can’t reveal confidences, but did the kids rescinded after the 2017 meme scandal who were your clients mostly land on their feet, and at 4 year schools that were a match for their academic abilities?
I think the danger comes from the hateful words and ideas spoken and published - not social media.
@GnocchiB By chance I know about two of the kids. Both had GAP years (one for sure was forced into a GAP because they withdrew other admission apps once they got into Harvard) and both landed at good schools (one at a top 5 liberal arts college the other at a top UC) both as freshmen/first years this year. My reply is maybe off topic?
I don’t think California schools are forbidden from rescinding a student if they discover information that would have barred his admission if they’d known it. The relevant law is:
If Kashuv had been admitted to Stanford, he wouldn’t yet be a student there, so rules that apply to students would not apply to him.
It would have made no difference. Stanford’s policy:
I would assume that the Stanford’s Office of the General Counsel has vetted this statement to ensure it is in compliance with any state and/or federal laws.
Yes, my clients landed at academically suitable schools.
I wonder if the same thing would happen to David Hogg if similar statements from his past were attributable to him.
I’d be pleased if Harvard readmitted him contingent on him doing X to Harvard’s satisfaction, and being on probation his first year. X would be a long list of things designed to wake this kid up. I remember as a teenager the first time I went to a Holocaust museum. For me, it was a watershed moment when it comes to realizing what people can actually do to each other in the name of prejudice and hate. But I also know that many years later when I chaperoned my D’s 8th grade class to a Holocaust museum, some kids were crying, and others had to be reprimanded to stop joking around. They didn’t get it. Don’t know what will make this kid get it, so I don’t know what X needs to be, but my fear is that this kid doesn’t get why Harvard took this action, and it’s only going to fill him with even more hate.
“I would assume that the Stanford’s Office of the General Counsel has vetted this statement to ensure it is in compliance with any state and/or federal laws.”
Nope. It’s the same way that many public universities have codes of conduct that violate the first Amendment. They can try to have them as a deterrent but if push comes to shove the First Amendment wins out over rules set by the school.
Harvard was clear that they were rescinding based on speech. ( said rescinding based ona reports “offensive statements allegedly authored by you.")
An “ admitted student” is protected under Leonard’s law in California. I practice in this area all the time. This absolutely would not fly under California law nor under federal law affecting any public university.
To @maya54 's point:
Your high school record is what colleges examine carefully for college admissions. Whether you agree or not, whether high school antics should follow a person for rest of his life, it’s a matter of fact that what you do at age 16 is going to matter greatly at age 18 when you apply for college.