[Marxism] In Search of Ward Churchill » CounterPunch: Tells the Facts, Names the Names

Clay Claiborne clayclai at gmail.com
Fri Jan 31 08:55:18 MST 2014


Very slippery for the judge to make such a ruling *after* the verdict.

Clay Claiborne, Director
Vietnam: American Holocaust <http://VietnamAmericanHolocaust.com>
Linux Beach Productions
Venice, CA 90291
(310) 581-1536

Read my blogs at the Linux Beach <http://claysbeach.blogspot.com/>
<http://wlcentral.org/user/2965/track>


On Fri, Jan 31, 2014 at 7:28 AM, Louis Proyect <lnp3 at panix.com> wrote:

> ======================================================================
> Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
> ======================================================================
>
>
> http://www.counterpunch.org/2014/01/31/in-search-of-ward-churchill/
>
> This is an interesting contrast with the Norman Finkelstein interview I
> just posted. Like him, Ward is "unemployable" but has made a much better
> adjustment.
>
> As someone who kept a close watch on Ward's situation up until the time he
> actually ran out of legal options to hold on to his job, I was surprised at
> how little I knew about the climax of the legal proceedings. This is really
> eye-opening, from Josh Franks' interview:
>
> JF: Let me stop you for a moment at this point. It seems clear enough that
> the jury's verdict would serve to exonerate you of the scholarly offenses
> alleged by the university. But, then, the judge vacated the verdict, didn't
> he?
>
> WC: Yes, he did. But it's important to understand that he didn't do so on
> the basis that the jury somehow erred in its understanding either of the
> law or of the facts involved. The verdict therefore remains unaltered: I
> didn't do what the university claimed I did--that was simply an elaborate
> pretext--and it violated my constitutional rights by firing me for the
> actual reasons involved. What the judge ruled was that such things were
> utterly irrelevant. Why? Because, he said, the regents enjoy
> "quasi-judicial immunity" from the consequences of their actions, at least
> when it comes to personnel matters. So, even though they'd plainly violated
> my constitutional rights by firing me, and had systematically defamed me by
> conjuring up the pretext of my supposed scholarly fraud, I had no legal
> recourse. In effect, I'd never had standing to bring suit in the first
> place.
>
> ---
>
> This is a very important interview that I urge you to read in its entirety.
>
> ________________________________________________
> Send list submissions to: Marxism at greenhouse.economics.utah.edu
> Set your options at: http://greenhouse.economics.utah.edu/mailman/options/
> marxism/clayclai%40gmail.com
>



More information about the Marxism mailing list