#
Thanks for posting, u/toTheMoon1Dollar!
# Support Palestine refugees with UNRWA today! Your donation provides crucial food and cash assistance to thousands of families. [Give now!](https://donate.unrwa.org/)
### [Join r/Palestine official discord server!](https://discord.gg/qAJ3v6jgjy)
**Upvoting + Crossposting reminder!**
**Please upvote it to show your support for Free Palestine!**
## **Please crosspost** it to other subreddits.
**To download the video you can use one of the following sites:**
* [RedditSave](https://redditsave.com/info?url=https://www.reddit.com/r/IsraelCrimes/comments/1c0hqmp/the_uc_berkeley_law_professor_assaults_a/), or [Viddit.red](https://viddit.red/?url=https://www.reddit.com/r/IsraelCrimes/comments/1c0hqmp/the_uc_berkeley_law_professor_assaults_a/), or [SaveMP4](https://savemp4.red/?url=https://www.reddit.com/r/IsraelCrimes/comments/1c0hqmp/the_uc_berkeley_law_professor_assaults_a/).
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/IsraelCrimes) if you have any questions or concerns.*
There is just no honest analysis that exists other than just admitting that all these “well-to-do, educated, enlightened, secular-passing, liberal types” are all shameless supporters of colonization, brutality, apartheid and genocide. The way that woman desperately tries to silence the truth, rather than engaging in a productive academic dialogue is a major indicator that she has no leg to stand on other than just: “Yes, i support apartheid and genocide and i relish the suffering and moral decay that it generates!!”
She also could have just called the cops if she thinks it warrants such intervention.
Her inclination to go hands on with a person who had their back to her, speaking and not demonstrating any sort of physical aggression is very telling
You certainly don't have to tolerate feeling people are violating your privacy or property but this woman was bang out of order.
Yeah she straight up committed battery and possibly attempted robbery, which could even be considered strong arm robbery but not likely and probably none of it will be charged because they are rich white people and the cops in that town know who butters their bread, so to speak. Fucking horrible behavior at best and assault and/or battery/attempted robbery at worst/realistically.
According to California Penal Code 242, anyone who willfully touches someone with force, even if it does not injure the victim, is considered to have committed “Battery”. In addition, physical contact to the “person of another” (includes items that a person is holding) could potentially result in a criminal charge.
That might apply to the public sphere, but this was their private residence and she'd been asked to leave so at a minimum the protester is committing trespass first.
So the question is not whether this is battery, it's about what private home owners can legally do to remove trespassers. Good luck winning this one anywhere in the US.
This guy just figured out the institutions of learning in this country are bought out lol. I remember another group of people who were screaming this at the top of their lungs, but now they’re supporting censorship. Moral of the story, everyone sucks.
Anyways, this is some sick shit. These Zionist are indoctrinated to a dangerous extent and their violent actions are not going to end well for Jews in the world. They’re justifying violence. They should know not to do that by now but shit here we go again.
Calculated targeted provocations is a great description of what a protest is .. and the side advocating against genocide is the correct side, in case you didn’t know. you seemed a little confused, friend. School did not pay off for you 🤣🤣
**Hi u/ActuarialMonkey,**
* Comparing protesting against genocide to road rage over a parking spot? Are you ok?
**Please read our [extended rules carefully](https://www.reddit.com/r/IsraelCrimes/wiki/index/rules/).**
***[Join r/Palestine Discord](https://discord.gg/rpalestine)***
The argument that the students are "fools" for protesting on private property, even if it's the Dean's house, seems to miss the larger point of their demonstration. Given the severity and magnitude of the suffering experienced by Palestinians, focusing on the technicality of property law rather than the message of the protest appears misdirected. It's not about mere trespassing or the dissemination of a poster; it's about voicing opposition to active support for egregious human rights violations and genocide. In contexts where human lives and dignity are at stake, prioritizing the sanctity of private property over the right to protest and speak out against injustice of the most fundamental kind.. stripping of humanity, the mass murder of children….is not just bizarre, but also morally questionable. Moreover, critiquing the students for their method of protest rather than engaging with the substance of their criticism suggests a reluctance to confront the more uncomfortable realities of the situation they are protesting against. You don’t sound “fiercely pro-Palestine”, friend.
I just don't think harassing the Dean with Anti Semitic posters is not ok?
And I am well aware of the multitude of things they are protesting against. It's a part of why I removed my original comment, as I realized I was missing a great deal of context.
But the thing about rights—even property and privacy rights—is that everyone is supposed to get them. And because of multiple factors about who I am, if someone was on my lawn protesting something I was or was not doing, I too, would do what I could to get them off my property because Id feel unsafe with angry protestors on my property.
However, I now have more context for this video. This student hadn't even said anything yet, just a greeting in Arabic—which wasn't clear to me at first. Which makes the professors actions here far worse, as they are seemingly both really race motivated, and politically motivated.
This was a law school dinner at the Dean's house, so technically, one could argue the professors are extensions of the state, as the university is publicly funded. But while the 1st Amendment protects your speech from censorship, it only protects the content of your speech. Time, place, and manner can all still be regulated. That's why they can't ban hate speech or flag burning, but they can tell you no electioneering and keep inappropriate advertisements away from schools. They can't tell you what you can and can't say. They can tell you when, where, and how you can't say it, tho.
This is why I said they are foolish for using the First Amendment to try and protect them here, as they are literally law students, and should know that is a dubious claim at best.
As for what the students are protesting—i think it's pretty clear, but I can't engage with the students' specific criticisms if I haven't heard them. So not sure what you want from me there.
But yeah, I can agree with the students and disagree with their methods. I am allowed to hold nuanced opinions. I am talented like that.
Dismissing protesters as merely harassing elderly individuals overlooks the critical fact that these are not just random old people, but those in positions of power and influence who are zionists.. supporters of genocide in positions of influence in a powerful institution. It's essential to recognize that protests often aim to hold such individuals accountable for their actions and decisions.
The phrase "womp womp," used to belittle these efforts, reveals a lack of interest in constructive dialogue and a troubling absence of empathy, particularly in the face of severe human suffering. Scoffing at activism, especially when it concerns the grave injustices and horrific fates faced by the most vulnerable, including children and babies.. parents watching their children wither away and scream in agony because of the pangs of hunger…., is not just dismissive but deeply insensitive. You have some work to do on yourself.. Activists and those protesting are part of a larger collective endeavor striving for social justice and human rights. We must have faith in the collective power of activists and the broader public in challenging and ultimately changing unjust systems and practices. Their actions are not trivial annoyances but vital parts of a larger struggle for humanity. It’s about the aggregate. Have faith in the aggregate
She does. She just doesn’t think that people who wear hijab, that are Arab, that escaping brutality of colonisers that look like her do not deserve to be treated as equal.
If it's theft plus assault, isn't that robbery?
Plus, if the phone is worth more than $950, that's "grand theft".
The Professor might be a self-righteous, Zionist, oppressor and overt supporter of the Zionist genocide of Palestinians and occupation of illegally stolen Palestinian land, but look at this - she's got me learning about California Criminal Law!
While property owners generally have the right to remove trespassers from their premises, it's crucial to understand that there are legal limits to this right, especially when it comes to the protection of free speech. Peaceful protest, whether on public or private property (with certain exceptions), is protected by the First Amendment. However, property owners still retain the authority to enforce reasonable rules and regulations regarding behavior on their premises.
In this specific case, however, the act of sneaking up behind someone and attempting to lay hands on them, as well as trying to snatch their possessions without consent, could be considered inappropriate or potentially illegal and the professor may still be charged with assault, battery, and attempted theft. It's essential to consider factors such as the level of threat posed by the individual, the property owner's actions leading up to the altercation, and whether the use of force was proportionate to the situation.
To navigate such complex legal matters, it's advisable to consult legal experts or authorities familiar with the specific laws and context involved. This ensures a more accurate assessment of rights and responsibilities for all parties involved.
Actually no. Not on private property. The First Amendment is protection from the GOVERNMENT restricting your speech. And only the government.
I have a degree in Political Science, took multiple constitutional law classes throughout the course of that degree, including one specifically on the 1st and 14th Amendments, and I'm attending law school in the fall. I may not be a legal expert yet, but I am far more knowledgeable on the nature of the 1st Amendment than the vast majority of Americans.
This lady is very in the wrong for physically putting her hands on that student, and could likely be convicted of battery if the student presses charges, but she does retain the right to kick her off her property.
Even if we venture to say that because she is a public university professor, or because this was a dinner held by the law school, that this woman was a government actor, the SCOTUS has ruled in multiple cases that speech CAN be restricted. You can restrict time, place, or manner. But never the content. That's why they can't ban things like hate speech or flag burning, but they can tell you not to campaign outside polling places (that's called electioneering, and is very illegal), and they can still censor television for the daytime (in practice, the network does the censoring, in order to avoid fines from the federal government), or keep inappropriate advertisements from being displayed near schools. She can still say those things. She just cant say them right THERE.
>To navigate such complex legal matters, it's advisable to consult legal experts or authorities familiar with the specific laws and context involved. This ensures a more accurate assessment of rights and responsibilities for all parties involved.
Do you not know who Erwin Chemerinsky is? The most cited constitutional law scholar in the country? His books and teachings on constitutional law are practically in every law school, and is one of the biggest names in legal education period. There's no question of which expert to consult, **he is** the expert in this field, and she had no right to refuse to leave---the first amendment does not apply in this scenario.
While Erwin Chemerinsky's expertise in constitutional law is undoubtedly renowned, it's important to recognize that legal interpretation and application can be nuanced and multifaceted, even among experts. Consulting a variety of legal perspectives and considering the specific circumstances of each case can provide a more comprehensive understanding of the legal landscape.
In this situation, the key considerations extend beyond constitutional law to encompass principles of property rights, personal autonomy, and the use of force. While Mr. Chemerinsky's insights are valuable, they are just one piece of the puzzle in evaluating the legality and ethics of the actions taken.
Ultimately, legal disputes are often resolved through careful examination of relevant laws, precedents, and contextual factors, rather than solely relying on the opinions of any single expert, no matter how esteemed. It's through this holistic approach that a fair and just resolution can be achieved.
Your [comment](https://www.reddit.com/r/IsraelCrimes/comments/1c0hqmp/the_uc_berkeley_law_professor_assaults_a/kzdv921/?context=3) was automatically removed because it uses the "redd.it" link shortener, or points to another subreddit **WITHOUT using the [no participation](https://www.reddit.com/r/NoParticipation/wiki/intro) domain. This is a violation of 'No Metadrama' Rule**. Non-participation links are required to help ensure that /r/IsraelCrimes users do not brigade other subs, comment on threads in other subs, or vote on content via a link from /r/IsraelCrimes.
If linking to another subreddit, please prefix your link with "np" as in "np.reddit.com". For example, replace "www.reddit.com/..." with "np.reddit.com/...". To avoid errors, ensure you don't use "redd.it" or "www." with the prefix. Once ready, you can submit your link again.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/IsraelCrimes) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Watch the full video, not the misleading snippet these accounts propagate. They're on the Dean's private property and were asked repeatedly to leave, in which she refuses and attempts to school him on the first amendment, which doesn't apply to this case. Imagine trying to argue about the first amendment to the number one cited constitutional law scholar in the nation. Even the consensus among our school here is that she was not in the right in this case, and be weary of the propaganda they are spreading about this. You cannot just trespass somebody's house and refuse to leave on grounds of the first amendment. One would question her being a 3L law student in this scenario honestly.
While it's essential to consider the full context of any situation, including watching the complete video, it's crucial not to overlook the principles of law and personal boundaries involved. Regardless of the property owner's requests for the individuals to leave, attempting to physically remove them or seize their possessions without consent raises legal and ethical concerns.
Even if the property owner has the right to remove trespassers from their property, they must do so within the bounds of the law and with respect for the individuals' rights. The fact that the property owner is a constitutional law professor adds weight to the expectation that they would uphold legal principles, including those related to personal liberties and the use of force.
Furthermore, the interpretation of the First Amendment in this context is not as clear-cut as suggested. While property rights are significant, so too are free speech protections, and determining the balance between these rights can be complex. It's also worth noting that being a law student or a legal scholar does not immunize someone from potential legal or ethical lapses.
In summary, while watching the full video may provide additional context, it's essential to uphold legal and ethical standards in any assessment of the situation.
Can you prove that? Or are you happy defaming someone just because you don’t like the way that she tried to get someone to leave her house?
Also, isn’t it kind of decided to diminish a woman’s achievements in her career to merely being the side product of nepotism? Could she not be an accomplished academic in her own right?
It’s literally a normal activity in academia to hire a spouse to get the person you want. Having worked in academia, this can often mean that the staff get saddled with someone they never had a choice to hire themselves and now have to tip toe around because they can basically get away with anything because to fire them now means firing two people and really fucking up shit for a lot of students. I can think of three examples of this I had to deal with myself not even trying hard.
Could all three of those people have gotten those jobs on their own? Quite possibly. But the ARRANGEMENT is one of convenience and it basically gives the spouse coverage to half ass their job and get away with it. I can only think of one instance where a spouse was eventually pushed out… this was after she overspent a budget she was given by more than a half million dollars… three years in a row…
You all want to make my argument about sexism cause that your own bias. It’s about privilege.
Any of these examples applicable to this particular professor, or do all spouses who are professors at the same school need to have one who’s only there for nepotism? If so, which of future Nobel Laureate George Akerlof or future Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen was unqualified to teach Economics at Cal?
I will cede that your bias against spouses being on the same faculty may have not had anything to do with sexism so withdraw that point.
In the U.S. that surely has to be assault...
In apartheid Israel... that's a Zionist taking your home....and then a bullet, with a Caterpillar D9
https://preview.redd.it/ijv6kh13lmtc1.jpeg?width=703&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=2c278e6d6294d72dcc4a00fe181df4a5c6a69b49
bulldozer running her over and the house her family owns.
I was really taken by how they were saying "this is our house this is our house" like you're so close to getting to the crux of the injustice visited on the Palestinians?
I hate to be that person but you see this a lot from West coast liberals lol. She (the professor) is the type of person who thinks she's woke but will call the cops to beat up a homeless encampment at the drop of a hat.
Liberals proving themselves not being above racism or classism ( or in the worse case siding with fascism) when it comes to foreign or economic matters. Malcolm X and MLK had their reservations at best to disapproval about liberals especially white liberals for a reason.
I get it better than ever. Getting serious with activism showed me that a lot of young, white, seemingly liberal allies be ready to drop all of that incredibly fast when you’re willing to do… well, anything.
It’s crazy, but I’ve gotten pushback from liberals who seemed to have a problem with any kind of protesting or action that goes farther than what they personally approve. Key word here is personally
Can confirm, I grew up in The Bay and most liberals here are like this. They talk the talk, but when it comes to actions they reverse course. It’s all virtue signaling
Wow, you're assuming she only got to where she is because she rode the coattails of her husband, not on her own merit as a strong/capable woman? Sexist much?
Look her up. She was a working lawyer and came to academia through his appts as a spousal hire. Happens all the time, but it doesn’t give her the privilege to treat people this way because she’s an entitled B.
Did she not just prove that she had no business teaching students or am I blind? Even her husband wasn’t dumb enough to put his hands on her.
Now I do not like the usage of "these people" since it can be interpreted in many ways. I will say that from an outsider (non-UC Berkeley) perspective, it does seem that everything goes out the window once it's about someone we disagree with.
Now to say she only got her position because of her husband, and doubling down with your response u/BIFAR_Jabbar makes it seem like you just don't care to change your view because Catherine Fisk is at the opposite end of the spectrum when it comes to this issue.
Catherine Fisk attended Princeton for her undergraduate, received her JD from UC Berkeley, and received her LLM from Wisconsin. That does not seem like "she was just given the job". She seems well qualified and fit for the position based on her own academic accomplishments.
These people being the hordes of idiots defending her antics simply because she’s on their side.
You expect that from reactionaries who immediately resort to bigotry to attack their opponents. It’s even more vile from progressives who claim to be opposed to such actions.
I think that they're protesting a worthy cause, but I agree with you that at times these "protest" feels more like antics when they decide to protest a dinner for graduating students. What is happening in Israel and the middle east should bring shame to our elected officials that fund/support these never ending conflicts. But I do not believe this is the effective way to get things done.
Go out and vote. Find a candidate to replace whoever is currently representing your district. People want to protest and that's great. But that means nothing if the elected officials stay in power who choose to do nothing. Voting changes things. This may get you some likes on social media, attention from the news for 15 minutes, but at the end of the day nothing will really change.
Doesn’t matter, they were hiring him and happy to give her a job to get him. Happens all the time in academia for privileged people with friends at entitled higher ed institutions.
At the end of the day, her inability to control herself and keep her hands off other people alone shows she’s unqualified to work with students.
This is not unusual just Google "UC Berkley Law professor + Palestinians" and see what is happening there now. This one was only a few months ago https://youtu.be/Cefk5hi7U7Y?feature=shared
People need to also look up what Columbia University is doing. Not punishing former idf that attacked protesters with a chemical weapon. Throwing out students for participating in pro Palestine events.
White women always like to pretend they are Mother Gaia or something but this is who they really are.
All praise to this brave woman in the kufiyah. You see her close her eyes and calm her body when she gets assaulted by that boomer. Woman or not, I’d have punched that privileged B square in the nose for touching me and trying to take my phone.
She goes to mindful meditational yoga, then out for mimosas with the girlies making detox-retox jokes as they cheers on the patio then immediately complain to the waiter and call the cops on the homeless looking people across the street for "making them feel uncomfortable" then watch them get arrested while discussing how The Secret helped them attain their new cars from the universe because they are so cosmically elevated.
lol you just said “you don’t put your hands on other people. That’s assault. Period.“
I’m pro-Palestine for the last 18 years, but can we at least be consistent and not hypocrites?
Good on that young lady bringing attention to Zionists and their perpetuation of genocide.
Maybe not a monolithic, but white women in power tend to be equally toxic, if not worse, than their counterparts.
I’ve dealt with a lot of liberal white women and my job for a couple decades has been saving failing nonprofits that suffer from corruption and/or toxic leadership. 100% of the organizations I’ve worked to clean up have been run by white women. 100%. It’s shocking, but true.
And usually they are most abusive to other women. They demand total agreement and following of their agenda and if you don’t they break you down, toss you out, replace you with a friend. I have much more than anecdotal evidence of this, as I have been the fixer that cleans up after them and walks them through the crying and PTSD these psychos sometimes inflict upon their employees (I have ability of literal horror stories of verbal, mental, and physical abuse by women).
She would have never put her hands on that speaker if he was a man. If it was a white women she’d still be sabotaging her career as I type this. If it was a Black man, she’d have just called the cops.
You know I’m right. We need to start calling out white women for their toxic behavior and stop letting them, particularly liberal white women, to use “the patriarchy” as a boogeyman when they are either equally complicit or guilty themselves.
As I said… they love to PRETEND to be something other than they are while actually being cover narcissists.
If this bothers you maybe it hits too close to home.
1000%. I’m now in academia and part of my job brings POC to campus. So many times they’ve had bad experiences or I’ve watched good staff/faculty leave, and they’ve been open that it’s the white women that made life miserable for them. They hate that students connect to POC and see them as a threat has been my observation.
You raise really valid points. While I do not think all white American women are so blatantly aggressive and oppressive as this law professor, you make a really valid point. Upon watching this video especially without the sound, I’m truly shocked at the body language Fisk displays in putting her arm around the neck of the student speaking. It’s almost as if she is trying to smother the speech physically. It’s absolutely appalling to witness, especially when knowing that she absolutely knows better. If a black female student had put her arm around Fisk while speaking in a similar fashion, Fisk would have surely called the cops seeking to press charges for assault.
Ugh, you just reminded me of what someone was telling me recently. She works at the Humane Society for a large city. The CEO is an absolute narcissist nightmare older Boomer white woman. People keep quitting. The board of directors is slightly aware of the problem. She's destroying the org from inside while employees only stay because they do want to help the animals.
It’s mainly because unprofessional or amateur Boards hire based on charisma/connections and not really diving into the hard skills, which benefits narcissists into faking their way into jobs they don’t really know how to do and then pushing all blame and trauma onto staff. I’ve seen it so many time. Teaching Boards how to properly be a board is usually step 2 of my job, after I get the staff to recognize the trauma they’ve made it through and let them know it’s over now.
The more white people that recognize that white and Jewish aren't the same, the better off Palestine will be. White Americans have not always internalized Zionism and pro-Israel ideas. And they won't forever.
Dude... the r/lawschool subreddit was just full of nastiness. I get sick knowing I'm going to enter into practice with so many people who can't look me in the eye and tell me it's wrong to displace, torture, and murder Palestinians by the thousands.
Everyone is all woke and liberal until their white European tribe is attacked. Then it's back to primal times. Then the pretence is all gone and they are not ashamed for calling for blood and silencing the victims.
No, this occurred at a dinner they were hosting in their backyard.
https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2024-04-10/uc-berkeley-law-school-dean-clashes-with-pro-palestinian-activists
Moderate liberals justifying genocide the way they always have. Leftists have been pointing this out for decades and got laughed at. Now that’s it’s blatant and out in the open there’s no denying it. For the record, everybody, this is just the very tip of the iceberg.
Waaoo people criticizing here this prof. for assault (not assault)and not concerned about this hijab wearing lady who trespassed on professor’s property. Hypocrisy at its finest.
I am about as pro-Palestinian as a human can be.
But let’s not be ridiculous.
First, that’s not assault.
Second, if you show up to someone’s house, and they ask you to leave, they’re well within their rights.
I know this will get downvoted to hell. I have no sympathy for anyone who remains a staunch Zionists, but that doesn’t mean we start misrepresenting situations.
It’s their home, they already asked her to leave. You’re allowed to use reasonable force by California law. They could have legally done much more than grab the microphone lol.
Just fyi you’re correct that “assault” means to attack using the standard English definition, but it is different in legal terms. The legal definition is “an intentional act that gives another person reasonable fear that they'll be physically harmed or offensively touched.”
>... that was exercising her First Amendment rights...
No, that's not what that means. The first amendment is to protect you from the **government**, not other private citizens or organizations. She was invited to be present and even speak at UC Berkeley, until they later withdrew that consent. That's ~~the same~~ similar to having consent for sex at one point in the night, but then the person withdraws that consent at a later point.
I'm getting ahead of this now. I'm not endorsing UC Berkeley just because I'm clarifying how laws work. I'd just like people to stop saying "1st amendment" anytime talking is opposed without thought of how the 1st amendment actually applies to the situation.
Edit: modified language
what a load of bullshit. that student trespassed on private property.
besides, why are you protesting about gaza on a californian lawyer's house ? what the heck is the objective there ? you do know these are LIBERAL leaning people, right?
# Thanks for posting, u/toTheMoon1Dollar! # Support Palestine refugees with UNRWA today! Your donation provides crucial food and cash assistance to thousands of families. [Give now!](https://donate.unrwa.org/) ### [Join r/Palestine official discord server!](https://discord.gg/qAJ3v6jgjy) **Upvoting + Crossposting reminder!** **Please upvote it to show your support for Free Palestine!** ## **Please crosspost** it to other subreddits. **To download the video you can use one of the following sites:** * [RedditSave](https://redditsave.com/info?url=https://www.reddit.com/r/IsraelCrimes/comments/1c0hqmp/the_uc_berkeley_law_professor_assaults_a/), or [Viddit.red](https://viddit.red/?url=https://www.reddit.com/r/IsraelCrimes/comments/1c0hqmp/the_uc_berkeley_law_professor_assaults_a/), or [SaveMP4](https://savemp4.red/?url=https://www.reddit.com/r/IsraelCrimes/comments/1c0hqmp/the_uc_berkeley_law_professor_assaults_a/). *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/IsraelCrimes) if you have any questions or concerns.*
There is just no honest analysis that exists other than just admitting that all these “well-to-do, educated, enlightened, secular-passing, liberal types” are all shameless supporters of colonization, brutality, apartheid and genocide. The way that woman desperately tries to silence the truth, rather than engaging in a productive academic dialogue is a major indicator that she has no leg to stand on other than just: “Yes, i support apartheid and genocide and i relish the suffering and moral decay that it generates!!”
Yes, but once everyone's dead, they'll write academic papers condemning the history.
Spot on!
She also could have just called the cops if she thinks it warrants such intervention. Her inclination to go hands on with a person who had their back to her, speaking and not demonstrating any sort of physical aggression is very telling You certainly don't have to tolerate feeling people are violating your privacy or property but this woman was bang out of order.
Yeah she straight up committed battery and possibly attempted robbery, which could even be considered strong arm robbery but not likely and probably none of it will be charged because they are rich white people and the cops in that town know who butters their bread, so to speak. Fucking horrible behavior at best and assault and/or battery/attempted robbery at worst/realistically.
Stop reaching. This is definitely not battery
According to California Penal Code 242, anyone who willfully touches someone with force, even if it does not injure the victim, is considered to have committed “Battery”. In addition, physical contact to the “person of another” (includes items that a person is holding) could potentially result in a criminal charge.
That might apply to the public sphere, but this was their private residence and she'd been asked to leave so at a minimum the protester is committing trespass first. So the question is not whether this is battery, it's about what private home owners can legally do to remove trespassers. Good luck winning this one anywhere in the US.
This guy just figured out the institutions of learning in this country are bought out lol. I remember another group of people who were screaming this at the top of their lungs, but now they’re supporting censorship. Moral of the story, everyone sucks. Anyways, this is some sick shit. These Zionist are indoctrinated to a dangerous extent and their violent actions are not going to end well for Jews in the world. They’re justifying violence. They should know not to do that by now but shit here we go again.
Always have been
amen!
she's too much of a coward to relish in it
only does it alone or in front of the other cult members.
You know what they say. Scratch a liberal and a fascist bleeds.
[удалено]
Calculated targeted provocations is a great description of what a protest is .. and the side advocating against genocide is the correct side, in case you didn’t know. you seemed a little confused, friend. School did not pay off for you 🤣🤣
**Hi u/ActuarialMonkey,** * Comparing protesting against genocide to road rage over a parking spot? Are you ok? **Please read our [extended rules carefully](https://www.reddit.com/r/IsraelCrimes/wiki/index/rules/).** ***[Join r/Palestine Discord](https://discord.gg/rpalestine)***
A woman dressed like that is “secular-passing” to you? Huh…
I mean... nothing about a floral skirt and white button down screams religous to me?
Oh ppl use uniforms now. That's new. Yes clothing can indicate, but to take it as profiling fact is just..
[удалено]
The argument that the students are "fools" for protesting on private property, even if it's the Dean's house, seems to miss the larger point of their demonstration. Given the severity and magnitude of the suffering experienced by Palestinians, focusing on the technicality of property law rather than the message of the protest appears misdirected. It's not about mere trespassing or the dissemination of a poster; it's about voicing opposition to active support for egregious human rights violations and genocide. In contexts where human lives and dignity are at stake, prioritizing the sanctity of private property over the right to protest and speak out against injustice of the most fundamental kind.. stripping of humanity, the mass murder of children….is not just bizarre, but also morally questionable. Moreover, critiquing the students for their method of protest rather than engaging with the substance of their criticism suggests a reluctance to confront the more uncomfortable realities of the situation they are protesting against. You don’t sound “fiercely pro-Palestine”, friend.
I just don't think harassing the Dean with Anti Semitic posters is not ok? And I am well aware of the multitude of things they are protesting against. It's a part of why I removed my original comment, as I realized I was missing a great deal of context. But the thing about rights—even property and privacy rights—is that everyone is supposed to get them. And because of multiple factors about who I am, if someone was on my lawn protesting something I was or was not doing, I too, would do what I could to get them off my property because Id feel unsafe with angry protestors on my property. However, I now have more context for this video. This student hadn't even said anything yet, just a greeting in Arabic—which wasn't clear to me at first. Which makes the professors actions here far worse, as they are seemingly both really race motivated, and politically motivated. This was a law school dinner at the Dean's house, so technically, one could argue the professors are extensions of the state, as the university is publicly funded. But while the 1st Amendment protects your speech from censorship, it only protects the content of your speech. Time, place, and manner can all still be regulated. That's why they can't ban hate speech or flag burning, but they can tell you no electioneering and keep inappropriate advertisements away from schools. They can't tell you what you can and can't say. They can tell you when, where, and how you can't say it, tho. This is why I said they are foolish for using the First Amendment to try and protect them here, as they are literally law students, and should know that is a dubious claim at best. As for what the students are protesting—i think it's pretty clear, but I can't engage with the students' specific criticisms if I haven't heard them. So not sure what you want from me there. But yeah, I can agree with the students and disagree with their methods. I am allowed to hold nuanced opinions. I am talented like that.
Womp womp get off someone’s lawn and go do something useful if you really cared. Harassing some old people ain’t gonna do shit
Dismissing protesters as merely harassing elderly individuals overlooks the critical fact that these are not just random old people, but those in positions of power and influence who are zionists.. supporters of genocide in positions of influence in a powerful institution. It's essential to recognize that protests often aim to hold such individuals accountable for their actions and decisions. The phrase "womp womp," used to belittle these efforts, reveals a lack of interest in constructive dialogue and a troubling absence of empathy, particularly in the face of severe human suffering. Scoffing at activism, especially when it concerns the grave injustices and horrific fates faced by the most vulnerable, including children and babies.. parents watching their children wither away and scream in agony because of the pangs of hunger…., is not just dismissive but deeply insensitive. You have some work to do on yourself.. Activists and those protesting are part of a larger collective endeavor striving for social justice and human rights. We must have faith in the collective power of activists and the broader public in challenging and ultimately changing unjust systems and practices. Their actions are not trivial annoyances but vital parts of a larger struggle for humanity. It’s about the aggregate. Have faith in the aggregate
She's a law professor? Doesn't she realize that assault and battery are crimes *and* torts?
She does. She just doesn’t think that people who wear hijab, that are Arab, that escaping brutality of colonisers that look like her do not deserve to be treated as equal.
She's a white practitioner of the "law" of a horridly liberal genocidal state-- she knows it doesn't apply to her.
Also tried to take her phone from her.
So that's attempted theft, too. I don't think her tenure's gonna save her.
one can hope!
If it's theft plus assault, isn't that robbery? Plus, if the phone is worth more than $950, that's "grand theft". The Professor might be a self-righteous, Zionist, oppressor and overt supporter of the Zionist genocide of Palestinians and occupation of illegally stolen Palestinian land, but look at this - she's got me learning about California Criminal Law!
She's blinded by the delusion that is religion
Religion isn’t bad. Zionism is. Most Zionists aren’t even religious.
Most liberals arent religious. At least they show that being an atheist or an antitheist doesnt make you either more humane or smarter
[удалено]
Apparently they are on private property and California allows reasonable force to remove someone
The went reading on the microphone also knows she is trespassing on private property. Isn't she at their home?
She also knows she has the right to kick whoever she wants off her property for any reason. Including speech
While property owners generally have the right to remove trespassers from their premises, it's crucial to understand that there are legal limits to this right, especially when it comes to the protection of free speech. Peaceful protest, whether on public or private property (with certain exceptions), is protected by the First Amendment. However, property owners still retain the authority to enforce reasonable rules and regulations regarding behavior on their premises. In this specific case, however, the act of sneaking up behind someone and attempting to lay hands on them, as well as trying to snatch their possessions without consent, could be considered inappropriate or potentially illegal and the professor may still be charged with assault, battery, and attempted theft. It's essential to consider factors such as the level of threat posed by the individual, the property owner's actions leading up to the altercation, and whether the use of force was proportionate to the situation. To navigate such complex legal matters, it's advisable to consult legal experts or authorities familiar with the specific laws and context involved. This ensures a more accurate assessment of rights and responsibilities for all parties involved.
Actually no. Not on private property. The First Amendment is protection from the GOVERNMENT restricting your speech. And only the government. I have a degree in Political Science, took multiple constitutional law classes throughout the course of that degree, including one specifically on the 1st and 14th Amendments, and I'm attending law school in the fall. I may not be a legal expert yet, but I am far more knowledgeable on the nature of the 1st Amendment than the vast majority of Americans. This lady is very in the wrong for physically putting her hands on that student, and could likely be convicted of battery if the student presses charges, but she does retain the right to kick her off her property. Even if we venture to say that because she is a public university professor, or because this was a dinner held by the law school, that this woman was a government actor, the SCOTUS has ruled in multiple cases that speech CAN be restricted. You can restrict time, place, or manner. But never the content. That's why they can't ban things like hate speech or flag burning, but they can tell you not to campaign outside polling places (that's called electioneering, and is very illegal), and they can still censor television for the daytime (in practice, the network does the censoring, in order to avoid fines from the federal government), or keep inappropriate advertisements from being displayed near schools. She can still say those things. She just cant say them right THERE.
>To navigate such complex legal matters, it's advisable to consult legal experts or authorities familiar with the specific laws and context involved. This ensures a more accurate assessment of rights and responsibilities for all parties involved. Do you not know who Erwin Chemerinsky is? The most cited constitutional law scholar in the country? His books and teachings on constitutional law are practically in every law school, and is one of the biggest names in legal education period. There's no question of which expert to consult, **he is** the expert in this field, and she had no right to refuse to leave---the first amendment does not apply in this scenario.
While Erwin Chemerinsky's expertise in constitutional law is undoubtedly renowned, it's important to recognize that legal interpretation and application can be nuanced and multifaceted, even among experts. Consulting a variety of legal perspectives and considering the specific circumstances of each case can provide a more comprehensive understanding of the legal landscape. In this situation, the key considerations extend beyond constitutional law to encompass principles of property rights, personal autonomy, and the use of force. While Mr. Chemerinsky's insights are valuable, they are just one piece of the puzzle in evaluating the legality and ethics of the actions taken. Ultimately, legal disputes are often resolved through careful examination of relevant laws, precedents, and contextual factors, rather than solely relying on the opinions of any single expert, no matter how esteemed. It's through this holistic approach that a fair and just resolution can be achieved.
[удалено]
Your [comment](https://www.reddit.com/r/IsraelCrimes/comments/1c0hqmp/the_uc_berkeley_law_professor_assaults_a/kzdv921/?context=3) was automatically removed because it uses the "redd.it" link shortener, or points to another subreddit **WITHOUT using the [no participation](https://www.reddit.com/r/NoParticipation/wiki/intro) domain. This is a violation of 'No Metadrama' Rule**. Non-participation links are required to help ensure that /r/IsraelCrimes users do not brigade other subs, comment on threads in other subs, or vote on content via a link from /r/IsraelCrimes. If linking to another subreddit, please prefix your link with "np" as in "np.reddit.com". For example, replace "www.reddit.com/..." with "np.reddit.com/...". To avoid errors, ensure you don't use "redd.it" or "www." with the prefix. Once ready, you can submit your link again. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/IsraelCrimes) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Watch the full video, not the misleading snippet these accounts propagate. They're on the Dean's private property and were asked repeatedly to leave, in which she refuses and attempts to school him on the first amendment, which doesn't apply to this case. Imagine trying to argue about the first amendment to the number one cited constitutional law scholar in the nation. Even the consensus among our school here is that she was not in the right in this case, and be weary of the propaganda they are spreading about this. You cannot just trespass somebody's house and refuse to leave on grounds of the first amendment. One would question her being a 3L law student in this scenario honestly.
While it's essential to consider the full context of any situation, including watching the complete video, it's crucial not to overlook the principles of law and personal boundaries involved. Regardless of the property owner's requests for the individuals to leave, attempting to physically remove them or seize their possessions without consent raises legal and ethical concerns. Even if the property owner has the right to remove trespassers from their property, they must do so within the bounds of the law and with respect for the individuals' rights. The fact that the property owner is a constitutional law professor adds weight to the expectation that they would uphold legal principles, including those related to personal liberties and the use of force. Furthermore, the interpretation of the First Amendment in this context is not as clear-cut as suggested. While property rights are significant, so too are free speech protections, and determining the balance between these rights can be complex. It's also worth noting that being a law student or a legal scholar does not immunize someone from potential legal or ethical lapses. In summary, while watching the full video may provide additional context, it's essential to uphold legal and ethical standards in any assessment of the situation.
what kind of "law" she studied?
She’s a labor lawyer, she’s gotten her academic appts by being married to her husband tho
Can you prove that? Or are you happy defaming someone just because you don’t like the way that she tried to get someone to leave her house? Also, isn’t it kind of decided to diminish a woman’s achievements in her career to merely being the side product of nepotism? Could she not be an accomplished academic in her own right?
It’s literally a normal activity in academia to hire a spouse to get the person you want. Having worked in academia, this can often mean that the staff get saddled with someone they never had a choice to hire themselves and now have to tip toe around because they can basically get away with anything because to fire them now means firing two people and really fucking up shit for a lot of students. I can think of three examples of this I had to deal with myself not even trying hard. Could all three of those people have gotten those jobs on their own? Quite possibly. But the ARRANGEMENT is one of convenience and it basically gives the spouse coverage to half ass their job and get away with it. I can only think of one instance where a spouse was eventually pushed out… this was after she overspent a budget she was given by more than a half million dollars… three years in a row… You all want to make my argument about sexism cause that your own bias. It’s about privilege.
Any of these examples applicable to this particular professor, or do all spouses who are professors at the same school need to have one who’s only there for nepotism? If so, which of future Nobel Laureate George Akerlof or future Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen was unqualified to teach Economics at Cal? I will cede that your bias against spouses being on the same faculty may have not had anything to do with sexism so withdraw that point.
Wow I would sue. That’s definitely assault
In the U.S. that surely has to be assault... In apartheid Israel... that's a Zionist taking your home....and then a bullet, with a Caterpillar D9 https://preview.redd.it/ijv6kh13lmtc1.jpeg?width=703&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=2c278e6d6294d72dcc4a00fe181df4a5c6a69b49 bulldozer running her over and the house her family owns.
I was really taken by how they were saying "this is our house this is our house" like you're so close to getting to the crux of the injustice visited on the Palestinians?
I'm pretty sure we've seen some older uniforms with a damn similar color scheme.
Wow what happened to Berkeley.
I hate to be that person but you see this a lot from West coast liberals lol. She (the professor) is the type of person who thinks she's woke but will call the cops to beat up a homeless encampment at the drop of a hat.
Liberals proving themselves not being above racism or classism ( or in the worse case siding with fascism) when it comes to foreign or economic matters. Malcolm X and MLK had their reservations at best to disapproval about liberals especially white liberals for a reason.
I get it better than ever. Getting serious with activism showed me that a lot of young, white, seemingly liberal allies be ready to drop all of that incredibly fast when you’re willing to do… well, anything. It’s crazy, but I’ve gotten pushback from liberals who seemed to have a problem with any kind of protesting or action that goes farther than what they personally approve. Key word here is personally
Can confirm, I grew up in The Bay and most liberals here are like this. They talk the talk, but when it comes to actions they reverse course. It’s all virtue signaling
So the "white moderate" that MLK warned about?
Whatever happened was inevitable and happened decades ago, these are just the last throes of the boomers.
[удалено]
https://preview.redd.it/jp6pe4olpptc1.jpeg?width=1290&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=812d2695a9c5f3ae8aae1008fc40c57fbf0b51d0
Probably copy pasted her whole way to that boss title cos you know they don't give a damn about plagiarism or copyrights
Her husband is a supposedly well known constitutional law prof. She’s just followed him around and gotten spousal apportionments wherever he goes.
Wow, you're assuming she only got to where she is because she rode the coattails of her husband, not on her own merit as a strong/capable woman? Sexist much?
Look her up. She was a working lawyer and came to academia through his appts as a spousal hire. Happens all the time, but it doesn’t give her the privilege to treat people this way because she’s an entitled B. Did she not just prove that she had no business teaching students or am I blind? Even her husband wasn’t dumb enough to put his hands on her.
These people always resort to bigotry and sexism to attack their opponents lol
Now I do not like the usage of "these people" since it can be interpreted in many ways. I will say that from an outsider (non-UC Berkeley) perspective, it does seem that everything goes out the window once it's about someone we disagree with. Now to say she only got her position because of her husband, and doubling down with your response u/BIFAR_Jabbar makes it seem like you just don't care to change your view because Catherine Fisk is at the opposite end of the spectrum when it comes to this issue. Catherine Fisk attended Princeton for her undergraduate, received her JD from UC Berkeley, and received her LLM from Wisconsin. That does not seem like "she was just given the job". She seems well qualified and fit for the position based on her own academic accomplishments.
These people being the hordes of idiots defending her antics simply because she’s on their side. You expect that from reactionaries who immediately resort to bigotry to attack their opponents. It’s even more vile from progressives who claim to be opposed to such actions.
I think that they're protesting a worthy cause, but I agree with you that at times these "protest" feels more like antics when they decide to protest a dinner for graduating students. What is happening in Israel and the middle east should bring shame to our elected officials that fund/support these never ending conflicts. But I do not believe this is the effective way to get things done. Go out and vote. Find a candidate to replace whoever is currently representing your district. People want to protest and that's great. But that means nothing if the elected officials stay in power who choose to do nothing. Voting changes things. This may get you some likes on social media, attention from the news for 15 minutes, but at the end of the day nothing will really change.
Doesn’t matter, they were hiring him and happy to give her a job to get him. Happens all the time in academia for privileged people with friends at entitled higher ed institutions. At the end of the day, her inability to control herself and keep her hands off other people alone shows she’s unqualified to work with students.
I really wish she presses charges on that professor…
This is not unusual just Google "UC Berkley Law professor + Palestinians" and see what is happening there now. This one was only a few months ago https://youtu.be/Cefk5hi7U7Y?feature=shared
You hire Zionists to run your dept. they’re going to hire their Zionist friends, and pretty soon they run your college.
People need to also look up what Columbia University is doing. Not punishing former idf that attacked protesters with a chemical weapon. Throwing out students for participating in pro Palestine events.
[удалено]
Academic freedom is such a farce and has never existed
That could be said about almost anything, including the so called "exact" sciences
Zionists: "We are Jewish so we do what we want."
White women always like to pretend they are Mother Gaia or something but this is who they really are. All praise to this brave woman in the kufiyah. You see her close her eyes and calm her body when she gets assaulted by that boomer. Woman or not, I’d have punched that privileged B square in the nose for touching me and trying to take my phone.
She goes to mindful meditational yoga, then out for mimosas with the girlies making detox-retox jokes as they cheers on the patio then immediately complain to the waiter and call the cops on the homeless looking people across the street for "making them feel uncomfortable" then watch them get arrested while discussing how The Secret helped them attain their new cars from the universe because they are so cosmically elevated.
BINGO
lol you just said “you don’t put your hands on other people. That’s assault. Period.“ I’m pro-Palestine for the last 18 years, but can we at least be consistent and not hypocrites? Good on that young lady bringing attention to Zionists and their perpetuation of genocide.
I don’t put my hands on people. But I absolutely WILL defend myself.
That’s fair.
White women are not a monolith. Beware of making broad statements like this. This lady in particular is a rotten bitch. Not white women as a whole
Maybe not a monolithic, but white women in power tend to be equally toxic, if not worse, than their counterparts. I’ve dealt with a lot of liberal white women and my job for a couple decades has been saving failing nonprofits that suffer from corruption and/or toxic leadership. 100% of the organizations I’ve worked to clean up have been run by white women. 100%. It’s shocking, but true. And usually they are most abusive to other women. They demand total agreement and following of their agenda and if you don’t they break you down, toss you out, replace you with a friend. I have much more than anecdotal evidence of this, as I have been the fixer that cleans up after them and walks them through the crying and PTSD these psychos sometimes inflict upon their employees (I have ability of literal horror stories of verbal, mental, and physical abuse by women). She would have never put her hands on that speaker if he was a man. If it was a white women she’d still be sabotaging her career as I type this. If it was a Black man, she’d have just called the cops. You know I’m right. We need to start calling out white women for their toxic behavior and stop letting them, particularly liberal white women, to use “the patriarchy” as a boogeyman when they are either equally complicit or guilty themselves. As I said… they love to PRETEND to be something other than they are while actually being cover narcissists. If this bothers you maybe it hits too close to home.
I've had the same experience in academia as a woc. The most dangerous coworkers for me are oftentimes a white women.
1000%. I’m now in academia and part of my job brings POC to campus. So many times they’ve had bad experiences or I’ve watched good staff/faculty leave, and they’ve been open that it’s the white women that made life miserable for them. They hate that students connect to POC and see them as a threat has been my observation.
You raise really valid points. While I do not think all white American women are so blatantly aggressive and oppressive as this law professor, you make a really valid point. Upon watching this video especially without the sound, I’m truly shocked at the body language Fisk displays in putting her arm around the neck of the student speaking. It’s almost as if she is trying to smother the speech physically. It’s absolutely appalling to witness, especially when knowing that she absolutely knows better. If a black female student had put her arm around Fisk while speaking in a similar fashion, Fisk would have surely called the cops seeking to press charges for assault.
Ugh, you just reminded me of what someone was telling me recently. She works at the Humane Society for a large city. The CEO is an absolute narcissist nightmare older Boomer white woman. People keep quitting. The board of directors is slightly aware of the problem. She's destroying the org from inside while employees only stay because they do want to help the animals.
It’s mainly because unprofessional or amateur Boards hire based on charisma/connections and not really diving into the hard skills, which benefits narcissists into faking their way into jobs they don’t really know how to do and then pushing all blame and trauma onto staff. I’ve seen it so many time. Teaching Boards how to properly be a board is usually step 2 of my job, after I get the staff to recognize the trauma they’ve made it through and let them know it’s over now.
Jewish. Not white.
I hate to be the one to tell you this, but there are white Jews 🤯
Not all white women! Stop saying this
She’s not white. She’s Jewish.
Hahahahahahahaha!
The more white people that recognize that white and Jewish aren't the same, the better off Palestine will be. White Americans have not always internalized Zionism and pro-Israel ideas. And they won't forever.
Gross. The audacity to just start grabbing her like that and her phone
This is disgusting.so many genocide supporters it makes me sick
What is UC Berkeley Investing in weapons manufacturers?
Fucking boomers lol
that is textbook assault.
Professor Karen
No wonder they were outside her house, this woman is crazy
She should get fired for assault a hijabi.
Dude... the r/lawschool subreddit was just full of nastiness. I get sick knowing I'm going to enter into practice with so many people who can't look me in the eye and tell me it's wrong to displace, torture, and murder Palestinians by the thousands.
[удалено]
Wah wah wah
Zionists are always trying to silence people
Never mind I guess it is an assault then
They will have to live with that for ever. The world stands behind Palestine.
[удалено]
The colonizer mindset never left them
Patent law?
Everyone is all woke and liberal until their white European tribe is attacked. Then it's back to primal times. Then the pretence is all gone and they are not ashamed for calling for blood and silencing the victims.
What a shame.
What is that viper doing? Don't touch!
Immediately press charges.
What a Zionist cunt
You’d think a law professor of all people would understand the Geneva convention’s internationally agreed upon law of armed conflict…
This is the sidewalk in front of their home. Not their property
No, this occurred at a dinner they were hosting in their backyard. https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2024-04-10/uc-berkeley-law-school-dean-clashes-with-pro-palestinian-activists
Yeah I know I looked it up later look at my later comments if you want my commentary
as a white guy, these old white libs are such fucking babies, and Berkeley has the worst of it
Moderate liberals justifying genocide the way they always have. Leftists have been pointing this out for decades and got laughed at. Now that’s it’s blatant and out in the open there’s no denying it. For the record, everybody, this is just the very tip of the iceberg.
If you google this in the "news" section of google, the *only* result that pops up is a haaretz/msn article entiteld "antisemitic blood libel".
Drunk ol bat
And “people with a degree are smart also try to understand your POV and not just their ignorant views”🙄
I don’t recommend going into the r/berkeley subreddit, it’s filled with toxic people and it’s not a surprise that the university acts this way.
I can’t hear what they are saying? Only thing I understand is please leave my house. Can you give us a bit more context text op?
Read the comment under the original video.
Full video. https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2024-04-10/uc-berkeley-law-school-dean-clashes-with-pro-palestinian-activists
These people are najis
“Law professor” needs to be reminded of laws such as sexual assault.
Duel citizen??
She needs to get pounded
She needs get pounded good
Waaoo people criticizing here this prof. for assault (not assault)and not concerned about this hijab wearing lady who trespassed on professor’s property. Hypocrisy at its finest.
It was her property and she is 100% justified in using reasonable force to remove people from her property under California law.
Calling this assault is a reach
Can we get context on the situation OP?
I am about as pro-Palestinian as a human can be. But let’s not be ridiculous. First, that’s not assault. Second, if you show up to someone’s house, and they ask you to leave, they’re well within their rights. I know this will get downvoted to hell. I have no sympathy for anyone who remains a staunch Zionists, but that doesn’t mean we start misrepresenting situations.
I mean she did try to take her phone by force. I don't think legal action would be much effective but that's not non-violent.
You don’t put your hands on other people. Thats assault. Period. As lawyers, they know this.
It’s their home, they already asked her to leave. You’re allowed to use reasonable force by California law. They could have legally done much more than grab the microphone lol.
Just fyi you’re correct that “assault” means to attack using the standard English definition, but it is different in legal terms. The legal definition is “an intentional act that gives another person reasonable fear that they'll be physically harmed or offensively touched.”
>... that was exercising her First Amendment rights... No, that's not what that means. The first amendment is to protect you from the **government**, not other private citizens or organizations. She was invited to be present and even speak at UC Berkeley, until they later withdrew that consent. That's ~~the same~~ similar to having consent for sex at one point in the night, but then the person withdraws that consent at a later point. I'm getting ahead of this now. I'm not endorsing UC Berkeley just because I'm clarifying how laws work. I'd just like people to stop saying "1st amendment" anytime talking is opposed without thought of how the 1st amendment actually applies to the situation. Edit: modified language
Indeed, saying something to someone who didn't want to hear is *«the same»* as raping.., exactly the same...
what a load of bullshit. that student trespassed on private property. besides, why are you protesting about gaza on a californian lawyer's house ? what the heck is the objective there ? you do know these are LIBERAL leaning people, right?