University of Texas Professors Sue to Block Campus Carry

Professors aren't allowed to ban students from carrying in the classroom under either UT policy or the campus carry law. That is why the professors are suing.

UT's attorney first argued that there was no impact on the professors' academic freedom because UT didn't have any policy to punish professors who flouted it - ergo the professors didn't face any harm. That led to an awkward line of questioning in which the university policy appeared very vague.

All of this despite the fact that the state attorney general's office absolutely shredded the plaintiffs' brief and laid out a solid point by point rebuttal to it. If the UT attorney had done no more than say "Uh huh - what he said" he'd have made a better argument than what he ultimately made.

And then after creating an issue out of thin air, it was left to the state attorney general's office to address that issue as well. To say UT is complicit in trying to sabotage its own defense against its professors understates the case I think. I hope the legislature remembers this come 2017.
 
It is certainly interesting to note that when UT was recently defending its admissions preferences, it wasn't sending out 5yr lawyers to handle the defense. Instead, it had a very competent, practiced litigation team.
Click to expand...
In defense of the University I think most would agree the admission process is a part of their core mission and conceal carry regulations are not. There were probably quite a few ticked they had to spend any money whatsoever on it irrespective of their personal stance on the issue.

Five years isn't Five days. Seems he just wasn't prepared.
 
UT has about 45 attorneys just on their in-house permanent staff. In the General Counsel office, they've got multiple attorneys with decades of experience. The attorneys for the plaintffs here have 30-40 years of practicing law each. One is a former Solicitor General for the state of Texas.

With all of those resources to tap, how did an attorney with five years experience end up driving that bus? And how is it the attorney decided to branch off from the state Attorney General's office argument and create an issue where none existed? I'm a bit skeptical UT sent him out the door with a "Go get him, tiger!" and no discussion of his brief or legal arguments. And if they did is that actually better?
 
BR noted
And how is it the attorney decided to branch off from the state Attorney General's office argument and create an issue where none existed? I'm a bit skeptical UT sent him out the door with a "Go get him, tiger!" and no discussion of his brief or legal arguments. And if they did is that actually better?
Click to expand...

Maybe... UT doesn't want them to win, but is obligated to appear to do something to appease certain elements there.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top