YAF wins 1st Amendment case against UC Berkley

[American]

https://www.lifezette.com/2018/12/h...eech-against-berkeleys-ideological-enforcers/

YAF won their case in the 9th Circuit of all places. This is quite amazing in a lot of ways. Free speech costs significantly less on the UC Berkley campus now.

Sent from Hillary's private email server.

 

[Xelor]

https://www.lifezette.com/2018/12/h...eech-against-berkeleys-ideological-enforcers/

YAF won their case in the 9th Circuit of all places. This is quite amazing in a lot of ways. Free speech costs significantly less on the UC Berkley campus now.

Sent from Hillary's private email server.

WTH are you talking about? The YAF didn't win anything in court, which is what "winning a case" is. The school and the YAF came to a settlement agreement.

From the article, the second and third sentences of it, no less:

"The school agreed to YAF’s settlement terms, according to a release by YAF’s Spencer Brown on Monday.
The notice of conditional settlement was filed with the court on Monday."​

 

[Excon]

WTH are you talking about? The YAF didn't win anything in court, which is what "winning a case" is. The school and the YAF came to a settlement agreement.

Though I personally wouldn't word it the way it was, I can certainly understand how capitulation to demands after the Court Ordered them to engage in settlement discussions, would be considered a win in Court.

Whereas on March 6, 2018, the Court ordered Plaintiffs and Defendants
(collectively, “the Parties”) to engage in settlement discussions with Magistrate Judge
Jacqueline Scott Corley;​

 

[American]

WTH are you talking about? The YAF didn't win anything in court, which is what "winning a case" is. The school and the YAF came to a settlement agreement.

From the article, the second and third sentences of it, no less:

"The school agreed to YAF’s settlement terms, according to a release by YAF’s Spencer Brown on Monday.
The notice of conditional settlement was filed with the court on Monday."​

Whatsamatter, butthurt that conservatives will be able to speak on campus at UC Berkley?

 

[Xelor]

WTH are you talking about? The YAF didn't win anything in court, which is what "winning a case" is. The school and the YAF came to a settlement agreement.

From the article, the second and third sentences of it, no less:

"The school agreed to YAF’s settlement terms, according to a release by YAF’s Spencer Brown on Monday.
The notice of conditional settlement was filed with the court on Monday."​

Though I personally wouldn't word it the way it was, I can certainly understand how capitulation to demands after the Court Ordered them to engage in settlement discussions, would be considered a win in Court.

Whereas on March 6, 2018, the Court ordered Plaintiffs and Defendants
(collectively, “the Parties”) to engage in settlement discussions with Magistrate Judge
Jacqueline Scott Corley;​

Red:
Yes. The court ordered the parties to attempt to settle the matter amongst themselves. It didn't order them to actually do so. Indeed, if the parties didn't arrive at a mutually agreeable settlement, the court would have rendered a decision:

1. Judgment for one of the parties, or
2. Partial judgment for one or both parties, or
3. No judgement for either party, thus allowing the lower court's/magistrate's decision (if one was rendered) to stand, or
4. Remand the matter to the lower court/magistrate for deeper consideration with particular regard to "thus and such" precedents, laws and/or considerations.

The parties arrived at mutually agreed settlement terms; accordingly, since they did so pursuant to a lawsuit rather than sans legal proceedings, the terms are, on their own, legally enforceable (as contrasted with a party's having to go to court with, effectively, a "new" matter pleading essentially that "so and so didn't comply with our ABC agreement to do XYZ"), unless the terms state that one or both parties waive enforcement rights.

Who can claim to have "won" as a result of the settlement? Both of them; that's what mutually agreed means. Win-win. They each got enough of what they wanted that the matter didn't need to be resolved by a judge of some stripe. That's what it means to settle a matter, to reach a settlement. After all, a settlement agreement is little other than a contract whereof a court/judge "oversees" the parties' compliance with the terms of it, but judges don't stipulate the terms of the settlement.

Party A: Judge, Party B and I came to "this" settlement.
Judge: Is that so, Party B?
Party B: Yes, your honor.
Judge: Okay. Done. If/when one of you feels the other isn't complying with the terms, let me know. Otherwise, "have a nice life."
​

That's about what a settlement is and how it works once the parties have reached one.

 

[Xelor]

Whatsamatter, butthurt that conservatives will be able to speak on campus at UC Berkley?

The very opposite is what I most prefer, so, no, not in the least....Indeed, among the most beneficial things for achieving my ends is Trumpkin conservatives' speaking and speaking often.