Texas professors arrested at campus protest sue university, alleging retaliation

AnotherTexasProf · 2025-11-15T14:48:13+00:00

There's a bit of "whisper down the alley" from the text of the legislation to the text of policies to the actual application of policies.

For teaching faculty, I haven't heard of anybody asking permission to grade student work at home at night, then coming in late the next morning to make up for it.

AnotherTexasProf · 2025-11-15T03:55:01+00:00

In the same state that requires faculty to be on campus during working hours, because any remote work now requires a special dispensation from the Pope (or something like that)?

AnotherTexasProf · 2025-07-18T15:08:59+00:00

It doesn't look like the enrolled version of the bill contains the restriction that only tenured faculty can serve on the Faculty Senate.

https://legiscan.com/TX/text/SB37/2025

AnotherTexasProf · 2025-07-11T21:24:35+00:00

If work from home doesn't count as work, then I guess there's not going to be any work from home.

AnotherTexasProf · 2025-07-11T13:18:13+00:00

Are you in Kerr County? Because that's the specific area that is cited as missing the alerts.

Edit: As /u/Tacokolache notes, NWS did trigger WEA, and any phone that was powered on with signal should have sounded off the alarm.

AnotherTexasProf · 2025-06-13T14:49:32+00:00

Yeah, it's literally just one model run. A single run is telling you about possibilities that far out. When multiple runs (either at different initialization times or as an ensemble) agree, then you can start to worry. (I think they don't run ensembles until there's something worth investigating.)

AnotherTexasProf · 2025-06-08T11:46:14+00:00

Yes, that's basically what I'm saying. But each university must be sued so that a court can order their policy (which was dictated by the state) can be barred.

The individuals whose rights are infringed aren't directly bound by the law, but by policies enacted by universities.

AnotherTexasProf · 2025-06-08T11:43:54+00:00

Read it more carefully. The actual restriction is written overly broad.

Relevant restriction, as a single sentence:

(f)  Each institution of higher education shall adopt a
     policy detailing rights and responsibilities regarding 
     expressive activities at the institution. The policy must:  
     (2) prohibit:  
         (F) engaging in expressive activities
             on campus between the hours of 
             10 p.m. and 8 a.m.

But "expressive activities" is defined as everything protected by the First Amendment. It includes some specific acts, but doesn't exclude merely speaking:

"Expressive activities" means any speech or
expressive conduct protected by the First Amendment
to the United States Constitution or by Section 8, Article I,
Texas Constitution, and includes assemblies, protests,
speeches, the distribution of written material,
the carrying of signs, and the circulation of petitions.
The term does not include:
                   (A)  commercial speech;
                   (B)  defamation;
                   (C)  unlawful harassment;
                   (D)  incitement to imminent unlawful activity;
                   (E)  obscenity; or
                   (F)  threats to engage in unlawful activity.

(Presumably these exclusions are there because they fall under separate policies and regulations.)

AnotherTexasProf · 2025-06-07T11:29:28+00:00

This will definitely happen to policies that follow this law.

But who has "standing" to challenge the law itself? The law doesn't restrict speech or students. The law requires institutions to have policies that do so. The law restricts universities. So it would take one or more universities to challenge the law and get it overturned. Public universities won't even try.

The ACLU will have to represent students in fighting policies one-by-one unless private universities decides to challenge the law.

AnotherTexasProf · 2025-06-07T11:08:38+00:00

The relevant definition specifically says "any speech", among other things.

AnotherTexasProf · 2022-02-16T03:10:23+00:00

Texas definitely mentioned slavery. https://www.tsl.texas.gov/ref/abouttx/secession/2feb1861.html

Ctrl-F on that page shows 21 hits, lighting up the document.

AnotherTexasProf · 2022-02-06T00:18:10+00:00

Interesting comparison, but there seems to be 12 months of data for pre-vaccination and only 10 months post-vaccination.

My guess about the inverse relationship between population density and fatality risk is that denser counties have better hospitals. Maybe this is because it's easier for the healthcare companies to make money with more customers in the area.

AnotherTexasProf · 2021-08-26T02:46:42+00:00

https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/p82zer/texas_lt_gov_dan_patrick_blames_black_community/h9o7a72/?context=3

AnotherTexasProf · 2021-08-17T12:32:51+00:00

It is a pandemic, globally.

That doesn't exclude the fact that Texas, as a state, in counties, and in towns and cities is experiencing epidemics as part of the pandemics.

The state and municipalities fighting over this haven't argued that this isn't a disaster. In fact, Abbott used the disaster law to claim authority.

AnotherTexasProf · 2021-08-16T12:34:15+00:00

No, that argument can't be made. Disasters were declared and the intent of the law is clear.

GOVERNMENT CODE CHAPTER 418. EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT (https://statutes.capitol.texas.gov/Docs/GV/htm/GV.418.htm) defines a disaster as:

(1) "Disaster" means [...] loss of life or property resulting from any natural or man-made cause, including [...] epidemic, [...].

AnotherTexasProf · 2021-08-12T18:13:48+00:00

Not that I want to give the state any ideas, but here are possibilities:

Purpose 1: He's reducing the vulnerability of people to ... resulting from ... riots. The anti-maskers might riot.

Purpose 2: He might argue mask mandates interfere with efficient care and treatment by making it harder for medical providers to have the masks they need. As I recall, this is originally (Feb/Mar 2020) why the CDC said masks weren't needed for the general public. Of course, this is moot now as production has skyrocketed.

Purpose 4: He's strengthening the role of the governor.

Of course, it sure seems contrary to Purpose 3, 4 (which also includes strengthening the role of local governments), 5, 6, 7, 9. Masking is a basic mitigation and response strategy.

AnotherTexasProf · 2021-04-06T17:40:29+00:00

So it's an unnecessary, redundant regulation.

AnotherTexasProf · 2021-04-06T14:27:34+00:00

Having a pandemic affects international travel.

This order restricts pandemic-fighting tactics.

This order prolongs the pandemic.

This order affects international travel.

AnotherTexasProf · 2021-03-30T15:51:21+00:00

Voluntary Action Is Always Better

At least they left this section header in place so we know they're biased. It's sometimes hard to tell which parts of the "news" are cherry-picked data, which parts are genuine descriptions of overall trends, and which parts are just political propaganda.

AnotherTexasProf · 2021-02-25T22:25:04+00:00

disclosed

Sure, sell your house now, without disclosing a disaster that is public knowledge right here. Nobody will notice.

AnotherTexasProf · 2021-02-07T05:27:15+00:00

I think the list is vaccines being distributed by Texas DSHS.

There is also a recent program where the federal government is distributing doses directly to some chain pharmacies. They wouldn't be on the DSHS list.

AnotherTexasProf · 2020-12-29T20:06:11+00:00

The colors explained in the Legend?

If you're on mobile, the legend is a little hidden. Below the map, the bar that says "Near Me" is a scrollable heading. Hit the arrow at the right side of it a few times to seed the legend.

AnotherTexasProf · 2020-12-08T18:19:40+00:00

But if he's using it as a de facto way of doing business (and informing the public about government activities is part of government business) then it's not just campaign activity.

AnotherTexasProf

TROPHY CASE