36 of the wealthiest administrators across the UC--including Berkeley Law's Dean Edley--impliedly threatened legal action against the UC if the UC doesn't increase the pension benefits of administrators making over $245,000. Currently, the UC caps pensions at $183,750.
More to follow.
Check out the SF Chronicle article .
Wednesday, December 29, 2010
Monday, December 27, 2010
Stand in Solidarity with Peter Howell -- Court Date
Arraignment tomorrow for Peter Howell, a UC Merced student who was arrested at the UCSF Regents' Meeting this past November. The DA has charged Peter for taking Officer Kemper's baton--these are serious felony charges. Of course, we've all seen the videos, which conclusively prove that Kemper dropped his own baton. By filing these groundless charges against Peter, it's evident that the DA is attempting to legitimate Kemper's intolerable actions--drawing his gun, pointing his gun at students for a protracted period of time, and subsequently shoving a person as he walked back to the line of riot cops. We will not tolerate the DA's transparent and base attempt to scapegoat Peter to justify UCPD's violent threats against students and workers.
Peter's arraignment is tomorrow!
Location:
Tuesday Dec. 28
9am at the SF courthouse
850 Bryant St. (closest BART is Civic Center)
http://thosewhouseit.wordpress.com/2010/12/27/peter-howells-arraignment-is-this-tuesday-all-out-for-support/
Peter's arraignment is tomorrow!
Location:
Tuesday Dec. 28
9am at the SF courthouse
850 Bryant St. (closest BART is Civic Center)
http://thosewhouseit.wordpress.com/2010/12/27/peter-howells-arraignment-is-this-tuesday-all-out-for-support/
Friday, October 1, 2010
Uncivil Procedure -- a new home
Dear Readers of Uncivil Procedure,
this is our new location, but our slogan will remain "fomenting legal insurgency."
More to come soon.
Update 12-26-2010. The new UnCivPro is about to be launched. Thanks for your patience.
this is our new location, but our slogan will remain "fomenting legal insurgency."
More to come soon.
Update 12-26-2010. The new UnCivPro is about to be launched. Thanks for your patience.
Tuesday, May 11, 2010
**Uncivil Procedure Exclusive** Chancellor's Statement on 12/11/2009
PDF version.
Impact Statement from Chancellor Robert J. Birgeneau and Mrs. Birgeneau
[caption id="attachment_214" align="alignleft" width="172" caption="The Chancellor prepares for battle."]
[/caption]
On the evening of December 11, 2009, just after 11:00 p.m. a mob of some 40 to 100 rioters, masked and carrying torches, carried out a violent assault on University House, which is the official residence of the Chancellor and his wife. The mob of masked rioters had rampaged through the streets of Berkeley, where they picked up prefabricated, accelerant-laced torches, lit them and proceeded to attack our home. Mary Catherine and I were on the second floor of the building when we heard a cacophony that was reminiscent of the noise in a full scale battle as portrayed in many war movies. Trapped on the second floor, we felt in severe physical danger as the mob, having smashed exterior light fixtures, attempted to break into our home by smashing through windows and attempting to set fire to the house.
The mob pulled down a Christmas wreath from the front door and attempted to light it on fire and lodged torches into the trees and shrubbery surrounding our home. They attempted to break into the house by ramming the front door with a garbage can and smashing through the front windows with their feet and other objects, possibly including large terra cotta planter pots which they broke. There was an extremely flammable Christmas tree just inside the front door. The windows were assaulted with such force that part of one interior wooden window frame was dislodged and glass from one of the windows sprayed five feet into the house. Mary Catherine and I felt terrorized.
We feared that this violent attack would continue to escalate as the rioters attacked the police vehicle that arrived on the scene after our call for help. Rioters attacked the officers, throwing lighted torches at their vehicle, and volatile embers entered through the open windows.
The attack received national and international media coverage and created immense anxiety for our safety and for our immediate families, including our four children and Mary Catherines two brothers and her 100 year old mother in Canada.
Following the attack, at least two persons, one seemingly deranged, came to University House in, the next days, urged on in their minds by the rioters’ actions.
The University has suffered damage, not only in the cost of many thousands of dollars of destruction to University property, and the additional security now required for University House, but sadly, to Berkeley’s reputation. The negative publicity associated with this violent assault has far outweighed any good which has derived from the peaceful student protests on campus.
Mary Catherine and I are still shaken by the fact that these acts were committed intentionally, with malice and reckless disregard for possible consequences to our safety and well-being.
Those who were at the scene, even if they were not explicitly involved in the assault, provided moral support to these violent actions and by wearing masks and carrying torches encouraged and ratified the mob’s violent and destructive conduct.
Yours sincerely,
Robert J. Birgeneau
Impact Statement from Chancellor Robert J. Birgeneau and Mrs. Birgeneau
[caption id="attachment_214" align="alignleft" width="172" caption="The Chancellor prepares for battle."]
[/caption]On the evening of December 11, 2009, just after 11:00 p.m. a mob of some 40 to 100 rioters, masked and carrying torches, carried out a violent assault on University House, which is the official residence of the Chancellor and his wife. The mob of masked rioters had rampaged through the streets of Berkeley, where they picked up prefabricated, accelerant-laced torches, lit them and proceeded to attack our home. Mary Catherine and I were on the second floor of the building when we heard a cacophony that was reminiscent of the noise in a full scale battle as portrayed in many war movies. Trapped on the second floor, we felt in severe physical danger as the mob, having smashed exterior light fixtures, attempted to break into our home by smashing through windows and attempting to set fire to the house.
The mob pulled down a Christmas wreath from the front door and attempted to light it on fire and lodged torches into the trees and shrubbery surrounding our home. They attempted to break into the house by ramming the front door with a garbage can and smashing through the front windows with their feet and other objects, possibly including large terra cotta planter pots which they broke. There was an extremely flammable Christmas tree just inside the front door. The windows were assaulted with such force that part of one interior wooden window frame was dislodged and glass from one of the windows sprayed five feet into the house. Mary Catherine and I felt terrorized.
We feared that this violent attack would continue to escalate as the rioters attacked the police vehicle that arrived on the scene after our call for help. Rioters attacked the officers, throwing lighted torches at their vehicle, and volatile embers entered through the open windows.
The attack received national and international media coverage and created immense anxiety for our safety and for our immediate families, including our four children and Mary Catherines two brothers and her 100 year old mother in Canada.
Following the attack, at least two persons, one seemingly deranged, came to University House in, the next days, urged on in their minds by the rioters’ actions.
The University has suffered damage, not only in the cost of many thousands of dollars of destruction to University property, and the additional security now required for University House, but sadly, to Berkeley’s reputation. The negative publicity associated with this violent assault has far outweighed any good which has derived from the peaceful student protests on campus.
Mary Catherine and I are still shaken by the fact that these acts were committed intentionally, with malice and reckless disregard for possible consequences to our safety and well-being.
Those who were at the scene, even if they were not explicitly involved in the assault, provided moral support to these violent actions and by wearing masks and carrying torches encouraged and ratified the mob’s violent and destructive conduct.
Yours sincerely,
Robert J. Birgeneau
Wednesday, May 5, 2010
*Breaking News* UC Berkeley Resolves Charges, Chancellor Issues Ridiculous Statement, Students Still Face Charges
See the Chancellor's statement here. This document is an Uncivil Procedure exclusive!
The Berkeley Law Campus Rights Project just released a statement detailing the final resolution of Angela Miller's student conduct case. The charges are resolved, Angela will not be suspended. This outcome is remarkable as the University originally sought a full 1 year suspension. In the meantime, rumors are circulating that Dean Poullard stepped down from Student Conduct oversight.
CRP.Miller.Press-Release.2010-05-05
Finally, a rally against student conduct under the leadership of Dean Jonathan Poullard was held on Sproul Plaza today.
UCMeP Speech.
The Berkeley Law Campus Rights Project just released a statement detailing the final resolution of Angela Miller's student conduct case. The charges are resolved, Angela will not be suspended. This outcome is remarkable as the University originally sought a full 1 year suspension. In the meantime, rumors are circulating that Dean Poullard stepped down from Student Conduct oversight.
CRP.Miller.Press-Release.2010-05-05
Finally, a rally against student conduct under the leadership of Dean Jonathan Poullard was held on Sproul Plaza today.
UCMeP Speech.
Tuesday, May 4, 2010
UCB Faculty Demand Suspension of Student Conduct
We, the undersigned faculty, call for the immediate cessation of all proceedings against the students involved in protest actions that are currently underway by the OSC. Such proceedings should be suspended until and unless the serious procedural issues that currently mar these proceedings can be fully addressed and rectified. Because it is clear that no fair evaluation can be conducted under these circumstances, we call for the immediate halt to all disciplinary proceedings against student protestors following from the events on December 11th and November 20th of this academic year.
It has become abundantly clear in the last weeks that these proceedings are not only seriously flawed, but that no just outcome can emerge from these procedures in their current form. The problems as we see them pertain to two separate but interlocking issues: the version of the code of student conduct that is currently used and the specific applications of that code in these specific cases. These flawed applications arise from inadequacies in the code itself and from flagrant instances of bad judgment on the part of those conducting the inquiries. These egregious applications of the code have raised serious questions whether those charged with directing a fair disciplinary review have overreached their mandate and contravened both legal and educational standards to which we, as a community, are bound. The rights to political protest, guaranteed by the University’s commitment to free speech and rights of assembly are paramount in this context and must provide the framework within which charges against any of these students are assessed. We note with grave concern the lack of a sufficient effort to balance these concerns with the alleged offenses as well as the failure to develop and apply appropriate measures for assessing these charges.
Read the full petition.
Download the pdf.
It has become abundantly clear in the last weeks that these proceedings are not only seriously flawed, but that no just outcome can emerge from these procedures in their current form. The problems as we see them pertain to two separate but interlocking issues: the version of the code of student conduct that is currently used and the specific applications of that code in these specific cases. These flawed applications arise from inadequacies in the code itself and from flagrant instances of bad judgment on the part of those conducting the inquiries. These egregious applications of the code have raised serious questions whether those charged with directing a fair disciplinary review have overreached their mandate and contravened both legal and educational standards to which we, as a community, are bound. The rights to political protest, guaranteed by the University’s commitment to free speech and rights of assembly are paramount in this context and must provide the framework within which charges against any of these students are assessed. We note with grave concern the lack of a sufficient effort to balance these concerns with the alleged offenses as well as the failure to develop and apply appropriate measures for assessing these charges.
Read the full petition.
Download the pdf.
Tuesday, April 6, 2010
The Urgent Necessity of the Abolition of the University’s Regulation of Student Political Activity
…a working paper* to spark discussion…
See related post here.
AbolitionCSC.pdf
Introduction
In Fall 2009, direct-action resistance to the UC Regents’ project of privatizing the University of California (“UC”) erupted systemwide. In response, the UC Administration is now punishing students on a mass scale for violating various provisions of the Code of Student Conduct.
Almost invariably, an alleged violation of the criminal law--which, of course, exists independently of the Code of Student Conductunderlies the student conduct charges resulting from the demonstrations and actions in Fall 2009; almost invariably, the UC Administration commenced its student conduct charges against students after receiving a UC Police Department (UCPD) report detailing the student’s alleged violation of a particular law. Thus, students who engage in civil disobedience face significant repercussions from two independent State entities.
See related post here.
AbolitionCSC.pdf
Introduction
In Fall 2009, direct-action resistance to the UC Regents’ project of privatizing the University of California (“UC”) erupted systemwide. In response, the UC Administration is now punishing students on a mass scale for violating various provisions of the Code of Student Conduct.
Almost invariably, an alleged violation of the criminal law--which, of course, exists independently of the Code of Student Conductunderlies the student conduct charges resulting from the demonstrations and actions in Fall 2009; almost invariably, the UC Administration commenced its student conduct charges against students after receiving a UC Police Department (UCPD) report detailing the student’s alleged violation of a particular law. Thus, students who engage in civil disobedience face significant repercussions from two independent State entities.
Friday, April 2, 2010
Wednesday, March 3, 2010
On the night I chose not to die . . .
On the night I chose not to die…
I was a woman of color. On the night I chose not to die, I fought with anger and determination, and finally fell asleep with a satisfied smile born not from my own sheltered existence, but from the momentary dissolving of the reality of privilege. That night I watched the hordes of college students exiting the bars and dispersing, walking past those of us confronting police in the streets as if it was simply none of their business. That is the privilege you describe, which has no place in this movement.
Who was left? Who made it their business? If you were there, if you dared approach the dancefloor and “battlefield” of the streets, you’d know what we “looked” like.
And yet according to your fairytale of homogeneity and privilege, on the morning after “I chose not to die,” according to you, I woke up a white man. Let me tell you… NO I DIDN’T!
It’s as though all the work I’ve done, the lifetime of daily struggle, of people acting as if I was naturally inferior and practically invisible, is a waste of my time. Because the people I also struggle for, among others, could flippantly assert that now, because I fight alongside my white brothers and sisters, I have no identity, no history, and no color of my own.
~~~
To the author of the “Open Letter to a White Student Movement,” we respond:
Read the entire statement at Occupy California.
I was a woman of color. On the night I chose not to die, I fought with anger and determination, and finally fell asleep with a satisfied smile born not from my own sheltered existence, but from the momentary dissolving of the reality of privilege. That night I watched the hordes of college students exiting the bars and dispersing, walking past those of us confronting police in the streets as if it was simply none of their business. That is the privilege you describe, which has no place in this movement.
Who was left? Who made it their business? If you were there, if you dared approach the dancefloor and “battlefield” of the streets, you’d know what we “looked” like.
And yet according to your fairytale of homogeneity and privilege, on the morning after “I chose not to die,” according to you, I woke up a white man. Let me tell you… NO I DIDN’T!
It’s as though all the work I’ve done, the lifetime of daily struggle, of people acting as if I was naturally inferior and practically invisible, is a waste of my time. Because the people I also struggle for, among others, could flippantly assert that now, because I fight alongside my white brothers and sisters, I have no identity, no history, and no color of my own.
~~~
To the author of the “Open Letter to a White Student Movement,” we respond:
Read the entire statement at Occupy California.
UC Above the Law?
For many students across California, the start of this semester looked unusual. Instead of checking in with their advisers, they were checking in with their lawyers. These students are currently experiencing the backlash of protesting against the University of California’s decision to implement a 32 percent fee increase last November. Several protests included the occupation of buildings on several UC campuses and an alleged attack on the UC–Berkeley Chancellor Robert J. Birgeneau’s home. These actions led to the arrest of hundreds of University of California students. Media attention waned once bail was posted, but the students’ problems did not end when they were released from custody. Many are now facing charges from the university's Center for Student Conduct, but no one seems quite sure of how the code of conduct and the law should interact.
Read More at Campus Progress.
Read More at Campus Progress.
Saturday, February 27, 2010
Unfettered by stifling bureaucracy.
An anonymous submission -- Ed.
The student-worker Movement should heed the lesson of November 20th: disruption of ‘business as usual’ at the University through direct action is instrumental to the Movement’s successful resistance to the Regents’ project of privatization of the University of California. For the experiences of Fall semester 2009 demonstrate that it is primarily through direct action—as opposed to delegating our authority to spineless, impotent politicians, whether in the Democratic Party or self-styled student leaders—that the Movement realizes its collective power. And it is only through the local exercise of this collective power—unfettered by the stifling bureaucracy of a political party or the institutions of the University—that the Movement can effectively press for and implement the fundamental change it demands at the University and even its host society.
A brief review of the November demonstrations and actions underscores the potency of direct action.
On November 18-19, students, staff, and faculty spent long days on the picket lines, chanting and marching in circles … while hordes of scabs walked right by the strikers. The Movement’s act of defiance—the workers in striking, and the students in walking out and supporting the striking workers—quickly turned into an alienating experience. Ironically, students and workers were disempowered by an action that should have been empowering. Those on the picket lines chanted, over and over again, that the University of California is ‘Our University!’ But those words rang hollow; indeed, it was as if the striking students and workers were foreigners in a hostile land—the disconnect between Us and Them could not have been stronger. ‘Whose University?’ The chant was not rhetorical—the University certainly did not belong to students or workers.
The student-worker Movement should heed the lesson of November 20th: disruption of ‘business as usual’ at the University through direct action is instrumental to the Movement’s successful resistance to the Regents’ project of privatization of the University of California. For the experiences of Fall semester 2009 demonstrate that it is primarily through direct action—as opposed to delegating our authority to spineless, impotent politicians, whether in the Democratic Party or self-styled student leaders—that the Movement realizes its collective power. And it is only through the local exercise of this collective power—unfettered by the stifling bureaucracy of a political party or the institutions of the University—that the Movement can effectively press for and implement the fundamental change it demands at the University and even its host society.
A brief review of the November demonstrations and actions underscores the potency of direct action.
On November 18-19, students, staff, and faculty spent long days on the picket lines, chanting and marching in circles … while hordes of scabs walked right by the strikers. The Movement’s act of defiance—the workers in striking, and the students in walking out and supporting the striking workers—quickly turned into an alienating experience. Ironically, students and workers were disempowered by an action that should have been empowering. Those on the picket lines chanted, over and over again, that the University of California is ‘Our University!’ But those words rang hollow; indeed, it was as if the striking students and workers were foreigners in a hostile land—the disconnect between Us and Them could not have been stronger. ‘Whose University?’ The chant was not rhetorical—the University certainly did not belong to students or workers.
Friday, February 26, 2010
"as more people joined the march and joined the destruction of capital"
Berkeley, CA – In Sproul Plaza of UC Berkeley, hundreds gathered for a dance party that began around 10pm on Thursday, February 25. At the peak of the party (around 12am) the 250 people dancing surrounded the loudspeakers as together they moved farther into campus. As we approached Durant Hall, a building currently being renovated, people began handing out communiques. We began to see a yellow light glow from inside the second story windows of the building, and then silhouettes of dozens of occupiers emerged. They rigged a few banners across the front of the building and descended to join the party.
Read more.
Read more.
Thursday, February 18, 2010
A Letter to the UC Berkeley Community Concerning Ongoing Prosecutions of Student Activists
Reprinted from a Facebook post.
We're writing to let you know about some disturbing actions the Office of Student Conduct at UC Berkeley has recently taken in prosecuting approximately one hundred student activists, including ourselves. Those facing prosecutions are alleged to have participated in at least one of three non-violent actions that occurred on campus last fall, including the reclamation of Wheeler Hall on November 20th. For our participation in this event, we are being charged with violating a number of regulations from the University Code of Conduct, the most serious being 321c, Physical Abuse. This regulation reads in full:
"No person on University property or at official University functions may engage in physical abuse including but not limited to sexual assault, sex offenses, and other physical assault; threats of violence; or other conduct that threatens the health or safety of any person."
We're writing to let you know about some disturbing actions the Office of Student Conduct at UC Berkeley has recently taken in prosecuting approximately one hundred student activists, including ourselves. Those facing prosecutions are alleged to have participated in at least one of three non-violent actions that occurred on campus last fall, including the reclamation of Wheeler Hall on November 20th. For our participation in this event, we are being charged with violating a number of regulations from the University Code of Conduct, the most serious being 321c, Physical Abuse. This regulation reads in full:
"No person on University property or at official University functions may engage in physical abuse including but not limited to sexual assault, sex offenses, and other physical assault; threats of violence; or other conduct that threatens the health or safety of any person."
Friday, January 29, 2010
Berkeley Law Students Publish Op-Ed
A Jan. 13, 2010, Student Conduct panel upheld an “interim suspension” placed on UC Berkeley Junior Angela Miller, a student activist who is accused of violating the Code of Student Conduct for participating in a demonstration on Dec. 11, 2009. The panel’s suspension banned Ms. Miller from campus property, ordered her not to communicate with any faculty or student, and evicted her from off-campus housing.
Read More.
Read More.
Saturday, January 23, 2010
Berkeley Law Student Statement of Public Education, Struggle, and Silencing Dissent.
This statement was released today by Berkeley Law students. A downloadable pdf is at the bottom.
Realizing that batons, rubber bullets, and tasers cannot quell the campus community’s opposition to the Regents’ project of privatizing the University of California (“UC”), the Administration has resorted to a more subtle but equally vile method of coercion: UC is taking disciplinary action against student activists through a process that violates students’ federally guaranteed due process rights, including the right to notice of charges, the right to inspect evidence, and the right to counsel.
On January 13, 2010, a hearing panel of the Committee on Student Conduct shamefully upheld an ‘interim suspension’ placed on Angela Miller. The suspension bans Ms. Miller, a University of California, Berkeley (“UCB”) Junior, from campus property, from speaking with anyone affiliated with UCB anywhere at anytime, evicts her from her off-campus housing, and more. Not only does the suspension immediately and clearly violate Ms. Miller's expression rights, due process rights, and California landlord-tenant law, but Ms. Miller’s suspension—and the Stalinist procedure that the UCB Administration used to uphold it—also show that UCB is willing to break any law, smear any student’s reputation, and arrest any protester to silence dissent.
Realizing that batons, rubber bullets, and tasers cannot quell the campus community’s opposition to the Regents’ project of privatizing the University of California (“UC”), the Administration has resorted to a more subtle but equally vile method of coercion: UC is taking disciplinary action against student activists through a process that violates students’ federally guaranteed due process rights, including the right to notice of charges, the right to inspect evidence, and the right to counsel.
On January 13, 2010, a hearing panel of the Committee on Student Conduct shamefully upheld an ‘interim suspension’ placed on Angela Miller. The suspension bans Ms. Miller, a University of California, Berkeley (“UCB”) Junior, from campus property, from speaking with anyone affiliated with UCB anywhere at anytime, evicts her from her off-campus housing, and more. Not only does the suspension immediately and clearly violate Ms. Miller's expression rights, due process rights, and California landlord-tenant law, but Ms. Miller’s suspension—and the Stalinist procedure that the UCB Administration used to uphold it—also show that UCB is willing to break any law, smear any student’s reputation, and arrest any protester to silence dissent.
Sunday, January 17, 2010
UC Berkeley's witch hunt
Berkeley Law Lecturer Stephen Rosenbaum is representing two students charged with violating UCB rules.
Angela Miller was thrown in jail and held on more than $100,000 bail after she was arrested from a crowd gathered outside UC Berkeley Chancellor Robert Birgeneau’s home. But even after the DA dropped all the charges against the eight who were arrested, the university is refusing to allow Miller to return to class.
No one has shown evidence that any of those arrested broke any laws when they joined a march on Dec. 10 that resulted in some property damage to the chancellor’s on-campus house.
Read more.
UC Berkeley law lecturer discusses the Office of Student Conduct from Josh Wolf on Vimeo.
Angela Miller was thrown in jail and held on more than $100,000 bail after she was arrested from a crowd gathered outside UC Berkeley Chancellor Robert Birgeneau’s home. But even after the DA dropped all the charges against the eight who were arrested, the university is refusing to allow Miller to return to class.
No one has shown evidence that any of those arrested broke any laws when they joined a march on Dec. 10 that resulted in some property damage to the chancellor’s on-campus house.
Read more.
Thursday, January 14, 2010
Legal Support Information for UC Berkeley Students
This email is circulating. The room for the meeting is confirmed to be Boalt 110.
**Important information about legal representation and support for
students facing Office of Student Conduct charges at UC Berkeley from
the 11/18, 11/20, or 12/11 occupations on campus or the demonstration at
the Chancellor's residence on 12/11.**
This email is coming from a group of Boalt Law students that organized
around the UC strikes in Fall 2009. We are continuing to find ways to
support the student struggle and have partnered with a group of Bay Area
attorneys (mostly NLG members) to provide legal support, counsel, and
representation for students facing criminal and academic charges
stemming from participation in the events listed above.
We invite anyone fitting these criteria to join us for a meeting at
Boalt Hall on Tuesday, January 19, 2010 at 7pm. Room TBA. Attorney
client privilege rules require that only students who are facing OSC or
criminal charges from these events can attend. We ask that students not
facing charges not attend so that students can speak freely and
confidentially.
In order to start working with you, we will need a copy of your charge
or letter from Student Conduct indicating that you are under
investigation along with your basic contact information and scheduled
appointment and hearing dates. If you cannot make the meeting, contact
Nathan Shaffer directly (shaffer@berkeley.edu).
This meeting is for anyone facing charges. We can discuss a group
strategy, individual strategies, and other ways that we can offer
support. We will not turn people away and can provide varying levels of
support that correlate to the student's need. This message is not an
open or unlimited offer of representation, but if you are interested
please attend the meeting. We are not charging fees.
Specifically, we are prepared to discuss assisting students with:
1) Representation at pre-hearing OSC meetings.
2) Representation in OSC hearings, insofar as the UC allows.
3) Challenging potentially illegal procedures in the UC academic
discipline process in court.
We are prepared to discuss both individual and collective strategies and
coordinating legal strategy with ongoing campaigns. If you are not
interested in a collective strategy, you are welcome to attend and we
can provide individual support. Therefore, it is important to meet or
contact us as soon as possible if you need assistance.
Thank you,
Nathan Shaffer
shaffer@berkeley.edu
Berkeley Law, 2011
**Important information about legal representation and support for
students facing Office of Student Conduct charges at UC Berkeley from
the 11/18, 11/20, or 12/11 occupations on campus or the demonstration at
the Chancellor's residence on 12/11.**
This email is coming from a group of Boalt Law students that organized
around the UC strikes in Fall 2009. We are continuing to find ways to
support the student struggle and have partnered with a group of Bay Area
attorneys (mostly NLG members) to provide legal support, counsel, and
representation for students facing criminal and academic charges
stemming from participation in the events listed above.
We invite anyone fitting these criteria to join us for a meeting at
Boalt Hall on Tuesday, January 19, 2010 at 7pm. Room TBA. Attorney
client privilege rules require that only students who are facing OSC or
criminal charges from these events can attend. We ask that students not
facing charges not attend so that students can speak freely and
confidentially.
In order to start working with you, we will need a copy of your charge
or letter from Student Conduct indicating that you are under
investigation along with your basic contact information and scheduled
appointment and hearing dates. If you cannot make the meeting, contact
Nathan Shaffer directly (shaffer@berkeley.edu).
This meeting is for anyone facing charges. We can discuss a group
strategy, individual strategies, and other ways that we can offer
support. We will not turn people away and can provide varying levels of
support that correlate to the student's need. This message is not an
open or unlimited offer of representation, but if you are interested
please attend the meeting. We are not charging fees.
Specifically, we are prepared to discuss assisting students with:
1) Representation at pre-hearing OSC meetings.
2) Representation in OSC hearings, insofar as the UC allows.
3) Challenging potentially illegal procedures in the UC academic
discipline process in court.
We are prepared to discuss both individual and collective strategies and
coordinating legal strategy with ongoing campaigns. If you are not
interested in a collective strategy, you are welcome to attend and we
can provide individual support. Therefore, it is important to meet or
contact us as soon as possible if you need assistance.
Thank you,
Nathan Shaffer
shaffer@berkeley.edu
Berkeley Law, 2011
Saturday, January 9, 2010
Schwarzenegger Aims to Co-opt “Books, Not Bars!”
Myopia has infected the Governor’s office, and once again, Governor Schwarzenegger has shown that he is full of catchy one-liners and little meaningful substance. In his final State of the State speech, the Governor exclaimed that California should not be the kind of state that spends “more on prison uniforms than caps and gowns.” He proposed a constitutional amendment to shift money from prisons to public colleges and universities and guarantee that at least 10% of the state budget be allocated to UC’s and CSU’s and limit state prison spending to no more than 7% of the budget. Sounds really great, right!?
Read More.
Read More.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)