@milgymfam - FYI, apparently random testing turned up 2 cases at Haverford…with more results due back.
That would be much easier as a Judge would toss it on Summary Judgement.
Yeah, I would say that it’s a matter of whether it is confusing because it is so unfair or whether it is unfair because it so confusing. Either way, it won’t survive judicial review.
@wisteria100 Purdue as well is mandating the flu vaccine for all students, on and off campus. They started their big flu clinic push last week.
How is it any less legal than the lockdown over spring ? That also “ discriminated” based on occupation. Why couldn’t all the say performing arts sector sue the government on the same basis?
The campus police are saying the biggest problems are on campus students gathering together in rooms. Two people live in the room but 10 people are in the room. The Greek houses are being told not to gather in the living rooms or study rooms. What? They are supposed to spend 2 weeks in their room with their one roommate, run to the bathroom (shared, in the halls), somehow figure out how to eat without ‘gathering’ in the dining room?
That’s just not realistic. Families that have 4 bedroom homes with 2 students and 2 parents working from home are having trouble with space but now students are to spend 24/7 in their dorm room or sorority room. Those rooms will really smell withing a few days.
Duke reported enrollment info…down 6% overall to 6,691, with 10% of freshman (174) deferring this year and 293 / 4% of upperclass taking a LOA this semester vs 50 in fall 2019. Given the very late change in housing to provide only one semester of on campus housing and most classes changing to be online only, it sounds like the enrollment impact wasn’t too bad and met Duke’s projections. The school was flexible allowing students to take a LOA up until the week after classes started. About 90% of currently enrolled undergrads are living in the Durham area.
They’re estimating a shortfall of $250MM due to losses in a variety of revenue streams (including sports) and increased expenses for financial aid and COVID-19 testing, and say they’ll cover shortfalls through cost-savings measures like hiring freezes, a one-year suspension of 403B retirement contributions and limits on new spending & capex (it’s annual operating budget was about $3B precovid). Considering Duke reported $2.6B of it’s $8.6B in endowment funds was ‘board-designated’ (i.e. non-donor restricted) that ‘could be made available if necessary, subject to the liquidity of underlying investments’…well, it’s a good thing they rolled back that 4% tuition increase that it put out there in July. If a pandemic isn’t the right time to use rainy day funds to keep tuition under $30K/semester for mostly online classes, I’m not sure what would be!
As for CU…the Order does sound overreaching but I wonder, did the University throw in the towel re: its ability to monitor student behavior because the threat of getting kicked out of school wasn’t enough to stop student gatherings, so it needed the threat of legal action? Duke had all students sign a compact and off campus students are subject to the same rules as on campus in terms of limiting gatherings to no more than 10, masks and social distancing required, students aren’t to leave Durham, etc. It says it works with city police as well as off campus property managers to monitor what’s going on off campus, and there is also a hotline for the Durham community to directly report coronavirus concerns involving students. I’m sure there are still violations but the approach seems to be working…though obviously there are far fewer students to worry about than in Boulder.
Well, I just think the courts are more sensitive to classifications that involve traits that a person - a natural person (not a corporation) - has no control over. Like their race, sex (and probably gender), age, etc… Behavior is another thing entirely.
@EyeVeee yeah, my D told me that today. She said people must be breaking rules because there were zero cases on the first testing when school started.
But it is behaviour that’s being restricted. No one is being locked up against their will. They just can’t “ gather” and I think that in practice, the police will only flag up serious flouting. They might ignore a boyfriend and girlfriend holding hands walking down a street or a dad and son together but will come down on a group of kids going to the beach with cans of beer in their hands.
More like industry. You were either in a business considered “essential” (health care, groceries, safety & security, education and the like) or you were not. Now, of course, the actors and actresses could have sued to claim that they should be considered ‘essential’ by the government but that would be a stretch.
Note, the feds have a long list of businesses/industries considered essential; they have developed that list over many years, so it’s had input from everyone and everywhere, and would likely readily standup to a court challenge.
In contrast, Boulder’s position seems rather arbitrary to this outsider. I fully expect some Greek alums who are now attorneys to file for an Emergency Injunction on their behalf.
Flu shot at Michigan is free to all students regardless of insurance.
That would be the “pretzel argument” that I floated a few thousand billable hours ago - but, got very little support for from the other legal eagles on the board. Otherwise, I agree with you 
That sounds about right based on the parents and students college FB accounts I have seen. For Fall 2021, I wonder if that 174 will impact the enrollment number next year? For example, will they admit the same number of students or will they make a downward adjustment to account for the gap year students. Might not matter too much when you have only 1,750 freshman. Hopefully the situation will be better in a year and they can house doubles back in the dorms and all freshman on the east campus.
A law or government act can be unfair without being confusing. Of course, different people may have different opinions on what is unfair.
The Boulder health order is not confusing, though it is easy to see why the affected people may see it as unfair.
Is age as legally protected a characteristic in US and US state laws as other characteristics like race, sex, etc.?
In my lifetime I have seen questions regarding one’s age struck from employment interviews, based on the idea that such questions are inherently discriminatory. You may be thinking of laws regarding drinking, voting, driving and a laundry list of other considerations that broadly speaking have the effect of setting “the age of majority”. It’s a balance.
As the parent of a D21 I’ve wondered this myself…D21 is not applying to Duke but to some other schools with highly residential campuses that I have to imagine also have similar deferral levels. Some of these schools may get fewer apps, who knows? But I can’t believe that on a dime they can target increasing their 2025 class size by 10% even if they could house them all. Have to think the schools are stressing about this too.
.
No. It’s not the same at all.
Is age as legally protected a characteristic in US and US state laws as other characteristics like race, sex, etc.?
[/quote]
I believe “legally”, the age of discrimination is 40 and up. So if you are 39 and 364 days and under, you have basically no protection under one of the Titles and the Fair Housing laws.
Protected class for age generally refers to older folks. For example, can’t discriminate over 40 in employment situations; can discriminate against older folks in housing purchases.
IMO, the Colorado issue falls under the rights of the individuals being forced to quarantine: Due Process & Equal Protection. SCOTUS ruled in the 1800’s that the fed and states have broad authority for isolation and quarantine during a pandemic, as long as such rules are not “arbitrary, oppressive and unreasonable.” IMO, that will be what any challenge is based on: is age 22 arbitrary? what about those students aged 23? Is including each and every young adult, regardless of whether they have been within miles of the nearest COVID case, unreasonable?