Is here someone familiar with the situation?
Can you explain what the students and DEI dean are upset about? What did Duncan do to deserve the treatment he received?
Can you explain what the students and DEI dean are upset about? What did Duncan do to deserve the treatment he received?
Edit: it isn't a simple disagreement that has no effect on the legal environment
Ideally, I would want my law students to behave differently in an adversarial scenario. To show they can have wildly opposing viewpoints and act professionally. To take down their ideological enemy while maintaining decorum. To actually be morally superior and correctly self-righteous. Should they have had a discussion of that prior to this collision? Probably.