Protesters of Justice Scalia escorted from Chapel by PSafe

During the Q&A of Justice Scalia several students stood up wearing yellow jump suits and black hoods. They were told to leave by PSAFE and escorted away.

EDIT from wieb$ (a member of the protest): I was told to sit down or exit or I would be put in front of the Judicial Board; I refused to respond and was then forcibly removed. Look for a post from our perspective (including the police/PSAFE/administrative improprieties we encountered as well as videos/photos) at some point tomorrow (?) (after this damn CSS paper is finished).

20 thoughts on “Protesters of Justice Scalia escorted from Chapel by PSafe

  1. Hello from the real world

    This type of action is incredibly important. Thank you for doing it, it’s cool if others want to defend the status quo, though the status quo doesn’t really need it. 

  2. Pingback: Can’t Stop The Spring – Wesleying

  3. love the apples

    Hey guys,

    I happen to be neither conservative nor liberal. They seem to be part of the same spectrum. I also don’t really like Dave Meyer, but that’s sort of a personal thing… I thought Scalia made some interesting points, and protesting him might have been sort of necessary for some people to do so they could feel good but I don’t think it made a strong point, except that Guantanamo is bad. The problem as I see it is that Guantanamo falls in a very grey area as far as the Constitution is concerned, and Justice Scalia made it clear that the only thing he’s going to do it say that something is not unconstitutional if the Constitution does not explicitly forbid it. So instead of hating on him for not calling Guantanamo unconstitutional (apparently he wouldn’t call abortion or slavery unconstitutional either, remember, and I don’t think he likes those) we should think about perhaps passing new laws regarding treatment of prisoners taken in a non-official armed conflict, or regulation of the armed forces by other organizations etc? I’m just trying to think constructively–it’s clear that new institutions are required and some outside of the box thinking, rather than merely criticizing someone who falls on the other side of a liberal/conservative divide (which is just a construct, people).

    Thanks!

    1. wieb$

      Except the Constitution stipulates that: “The Privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it.”

  4. Seriously

    the fact that there is so much animosity towards the protesters is extremely upsetting. people at this school are much more conservative than they like to think they are

      1. Batte_A

        For me, the key observation in Seriously’s comment isn’t that being conservative is [negative adjective] – it’s that many Wesleyan students who *are* think they *aren’t*. A pretty common state of affairs in the U.S., since the center line in American politics (e.g. Obama) is notably to the right of much of the rest of the world. 

        tl;dr voting Democrat =/= being liberal/leftist.

  5. Pingback: Campus Report: When Students Protest Speakers On Human Rights Grounds... - Tenured Radical - The Chronicle of Higher Education

  6. Democracy

    Maybe engaging in a respectful conversation to get your points across instead of hiding your faces and disrespecting others at the event would have gotten you some respect.  You looked foolish in your feeble attempt at disruption.  Forcibly  removed??  Bring your antics and your homeless friends from New Haven in to the real world and you will see what force is all about.  You were treated like the babies that you are.

    1. Shamdemocracy

      This is laughable. You might remember that during the Q+A, the moderators only allowed a quota of three questions from Wesleyan students, all sitting, interestingly enough, in a specific front-and-center section of the chapel. It’s fairly obvious that the managed nature of the Q+A wasn’t designed to allow real, challenging questions (Bush v. Gore? Gimme a break, I honestly agree with Scalia…). Respectful conversation isn’t the only avenue available to us if we wish to effect change, nor is it often available to us at all.

      And as for the “real world,” where do you think it is, exactly? Which is more real, being beaten and gassed by uniformed gangs in lower Manhattan, or sleeping outside in the 4th most dangerous city in the US? Trick question, they’re both real. I’d love to see your Real World; is it Newton, MA? Westchester? The intern breakroom at JP Morgan?

  7. Antonin Scalia

    Well, I say Right On.
    The banner was more succinct and successful in asking what a lot of the questions seemed only comfortable to skirt around, and was certainly the more appropriate and elegant statement than all of the wespeaks combined.
    The action, as well, I greatly applaud.  It was considerate, potent, and rather clever in co-opting Public Safety’s response into part of the performance itself.

    If only the disrupted would take a moment to think.

  8. Reap what you sow

    wieb$-
    The school’s policy on protests which you made the world know the school had made you  explicitly aware of clearly sates “Protests, sit-ins, demonstrations, student strikes, and other forms of expressions violate the Code of Non-Academic Conduct when they:Disrupt or obstruct curricular, co-curricular, or administrative/operational activities of the University” By standing up in the middle of Scallla’s presentation you were disrupting from an event many people had put a lot of effort into making happen. The fact that David Meyer gave you the chance to sit down offered a  generous reprieve from a violation you had clearly committed. Your refusal to even respond fully opens you up to an SJB hearing and the according punishment. You willingly violated CNAC, accept the consequences. 

    Please stop using wesleying as your misguided soapbox. 

    1. wieb$

      For one, I was not a part of the group that received the aforementioned email (as I did not participate in the Wespeaks). I’m not going to engage you on the point about CNAC since neither of our interpretations actually matter, seeing as neither of us are in a position of authority here (presumably). Finally, my addendum was not a partial one–it was simply meant to further contextualize the video. In my bit above, I took no position on PSafe’s actions, I merely described the turn of events before my removal.

  9. upstairs

    maybe if you and the idiots who unfurled that stupid banner upside down had sat down and listened to his answers to some interesting questions you’d have realized that you were protesting the wrong event: he said the job of the supreme court justice is not to make laws, but to interpret them. You can’t protest the judgers. you protest the lawmakers.

    Also, they had every right to remove you. Not only were you guys being rude, but you were a distraction. You did the same thing radical republican pundits do every night: polarize a meaningful,  calm discussion. Good job. 
    No one is feeling sorry for you guys

    Idiots

    1. Lol

      can’t tell if this is tongue in cheek…but you do know that banner was intentionally backwards, right?

      …right?

    1. wieb$

      forcible |?fôrs?b?l|

      adjective

      done by force

      While I left my seat voluntarily, I was pushed out of the Chapel doors. Think it fits the definition

      1. pathetic

        To the protestors – This is why no one will ever respect your actions – you don’t respect other people. People will engage with you on your level – if you act like you’re 10, people will treat you like you’re 10. If you man up/woman up/zir up and acknowledge that Scalia has valid points that you may not agree with (heck, I don’t agree with Scalia) then maybe people will listen to you and acknowledge you have a point. 

        Being told not to demonstrate, going ahead and doing just that, then bitching about it will get you nowhere. 

        1. who's the 10 year old?

          Peacefully, respectfully exercising one’s right to free speech in a public forum > bitching anonymously on the internet

Comments are closed.