WASHINGTON - s4story -- Those who value free speech should consider reporting law students who deliberately prevent guests from speaking to bar admission authorities, suggests public interest law professor John Banzhaf, who has filed several successful bar complaints.

He was reacting to the latest such violation and disruption which occurred when law students at Stanford Law School deliberately prevented a federal appeals court judge from speaking.

Since it appears that the school will not be disciplining any of the student offenders, the only effective remedy might be for law students and/or law faculty concerned about free speech to consider informing bar admission authorities of their actions.

As the law school admitted in a letter, the deliberate disruption of the invited speaker "was inconsistent with our policies on free speech."

More on S For Story

• Crunchbase Ranks Phinge Founder & CEO Robert DeMaio #1 Globally. Meet him in Las Vegas-Week of CES to Learn About Netverse, Patented App-less Platform
• Renowned Nutritionist and Alternative Medicine Specialist Dr. Sebi and His Method of Treating Disease Are the Focus of New Book
• IODefi Introduces New Web3 Infrastructure Framework as XRP Ledger Development Gains Global Attention
• Terizza Forms Strategic Collaboration with UC San Diego to Pioneer Next-Generation Distributed AI Infrastructure
• EnergyStrat Launches Global LNG Risk Outlook 2025–2030

So, although Stanford may refuse to discipline the offending students, authorities charged with insuring that applicants for the bar possess the requisite character and fitness to be entrusted with the enormous powers which those admitted to the bar wield may well take a dim view of such conduct.

As the judge explained: "If enough of these kids get into the legal profession," he said, "the rule of law will descend into barbarism."

If Stanford refuses to enforce its own free speech policy and discipline the student disruptors, the only effective remedy may be for other law students and/or law faculty who care about free speech to consider informing bar admission authorities of what they did, and let bar authorities decide whether they are nevertheless fit to become lawyers - just as those who violated other school rules such as those concerning plagiarism or other forms of cheating, sexual harassment, stealing, etc. might likewise be reported.

More on S For Story

• Strong Revenue Gains, Accelerating Growth, Strategic Hospital Expansion & Uplisting Advancements: Cardiff Lexington Corporation (Stock Symbol: CDIX)
• Holiday Decorations Most Likely to Cause Injuries
• UK Financial Ltd Confirms Official Corporate Structure of the Maya Preferred Project and Its Dual-Class Token System
• Christmas Guide Helps People Save Money and Stay Organized with AI
• CCHR Florida Joins Global Call to Ban Electroshock Treatment, Citing New Evidence of Widespread Patient Harm

A few such law students might be denied admission to the bar, at least for a while, and others will probably - at the very least - have their admission delayed by hearings and other proceedings, says Prof. Banzhaf, who has filed several successful bar complaints, and who notes that complaints may even be filed anonymously.

The facts underlying the complaints should not be in issue, Banzhaf says, noting that there are many cell-phone video recordings showing which law students deliberately disrupted the judge's speech; recordings which could be mailed to bar authorities to document and support the complaint.

If no one is willing to actually file such complaints now after the fact, at the very least law students at Stanford - and at the many other law schools where similar free speech violations have occurred - should be put on notice that formal bar admission complaints may be filed in the future if similar violations occur, suggests Banzhaf.

http://banzhaf.net/   jbanzhaf3ATgmail.com   @profbanzhaf