Ann Coulter backers file lawsuit against UC Berkeley administrators

coulter_bobby_lee_staff
Bobby Lee/Staff

Related Posts

Ann Coulter announced via Twitter that Berkeley College Republicans and the Young America’s Foundation filed a lawsuit Monday morning against several University of California and UC Berkeley administrators.

The lawsuit lists UC President Janet Napolitano, UC Berkeley Chancellor Nicholas Dirks, Interim Vice Chancellor for Student Affairs Stephen Sutton, Associate Vice Chancellor and Dean of Students Joseph Greenwell, UCPD Chief Margo Bennett, UCPD Operations Division Captain Alex Yao and UCPD Patrol Lieutenant Leroy Harris as defendants. The suit alleges that the plaintiffs are suing the defendants for an alleged discriminatory policy “to restrict conservative speech on the UC Berkeley campus,” violating their free speech, equal protection and due process.

“Defendants freely admit that they have permitted the demands of a faceless, rabid, off-campus mob to dictate what speech is permitted at the center of campus during prime time, and which speech may be marginalized, burdened, and regulated out of its very existence by this unlawful heckler’s veto,” the complaint alleges.

BCR spokesperson Naweed Tahmas could not be reached for comment as of press time.

UC spokesperson Dianne Klein released a statement Monday afternoon, in which she denied the allegations in the lawsuit. She added that the Young America’s Foundation has sponsored many speaking events on the UC Berkeley campus over the past few years, including Ben Shapiro.

“The University of California welcomes speakers of all political viewpoints and is committed to providing a forum to enable Ann Coulter to speak on the Berkeley campus,” Klein said in her statement. “UC Berkeley has been working to accommodate a mutually agreeable time for Ms. Coulter’s visit — which has not yet been scheduled — and remains committed to doing so. The campus seeks to ensure that all members of the Berkeley and larger community — including Ms. Coulter herself — remain safe during such an event.”

The complaint states that the campus’s curfew and venue restrictions have forced BCR to cancel two speaking events featuring well-known conservative speakers, including author David Horowitz and political commentator Ann Coulter. The campus announced soon after the cancellation of Coulter’s visit, however, that the event would be postponed to May 2. But the campus has seized all planning for the event because BCR threatened to file the lawsuit.

The complaint also references the cancellation of the Milo Yiannopoulos event, stating that it is another example of UC Berkeley allegedly violating free speech.

BCR hired an attorney, Harmeet Dhillon, last week and threatened to sue the campus for postponing Coulter’s event.

In the complaint, the plaintiffs allege that the campus’s policies are “unconstitutionally vague” and are directed at burdening or banning speaking engagements that express conservative viewpoints.

“(Young America’s Foundation) and BCR seek temporary and permanent injunctive relief to prevent Defendants from continuing to muzzle Plaintiffs’ constitutionally-protected speech, and to enjoin the Defendants’ transparent attempts to stifle political discourse at UC Berkeley,” the complaint alleges. “Plaintiffs also seek damages from each Defendant sued in his or her individual capacity.”

In a Monday afternoon press conference, Dhillon explained that the plaintiffs are asking for an injunction to prevent the campus from enforcing the allegedly unwritten and unpublicized “high profile speakers policy.”

At the press conference, Dhillon alleged that the policy allows the campus administration to unilaterally declare an invited speaker “high profile,” making it permissible to restrict the time, manner and place of where that guest is allowed to speak on campus. She also alleged that this policy is being partially driven by Mayor Jesse Arreguín’s office.

Arreguín responded to the allegations in an emailed statement Monday evening, emphasizing his commitment to continuing the city’s “legacy as the birthplace of the Free Speech Movement.” He added that he spoke with Dirks and other campus officials after the Yiannopoulos event was canceled to work to ensure the protection of First Amendment rights and the safety of the campus community.

Dhillon alleged at the press conference that this “problem runs deeper than (the) Ann Coulter event,” stressing the need for action.

“What we have a is a shadowy policy that is double-secret, a policy that is going to be applied in the future unless it’s going to be debated,” Dhillon said at the press conference. “They need to change their unwritten policy, staff security appropriately and ask (the) mayor to do his job.”


Contact Chantelle Lee and Bobby Lee at [email protected].

Please keep our community civil. Comments should remain on topic and be respectful.
Read our full comment policy
  • C Bierbauer78

    Anns brownshirts like Milo’s will come to Berkeley as they have in the past, to intentionally provoke a response for media attention. :Read what happened in the Pacific Northwest: “Couple came armed and ready to goad Seattle protesters at Yiannopoulos speech, court papers say” (from OregonLive).

    Starting a conflict then pointing at the people you assault and scream that “They Started It” is a childish and transparent stunt, familiar to any adult, but the best the Trumpaqnzees can manage.

    • FreedomFan

      Sure comrade, being paid to speak to listeners who voluntarily come to hear you speak is tantamount to “assaulting” your listeners. You have the brains of an ice cube.

    • RU_Serious

      They came armed so they could defend themselves from the violent mob of antifa fascists that showed up to assault them. And when one attacked her husband she shot him to protect her husband. And she has not been charged, because self defense is perfectly legal. And so is carrying firearms in most places outside of California.

      If the fascist antifa terrorists don’t want to get shot then they shouldn’t attack people simply because they have an opposing political view.

  • Michele F. Rogel

    About time, people stand up – this is America, time to get these snowflake idiots gone!!!

  • Sandra Dee

    College students, this is how to handle an event that features a speaker with ideas you find offensive:

    If you want to picket the talk, do it. If you want to attend the talk and ask hard questions during the Q&A period, great. If you want to write poison-pen editorials about how racist/‌sexist/‌homophobic/‌sinful students were to even invite the speaker, cool. (Although someone might write something of their own mocking your offensensitivity.)

    But you may not disrupt the event, which goes beyond merely exercising your own freedom of speech. No heckling. No pulling fire alarms. No throwing smoke bombs. No loud drums or chanting. You may not violate ethical and academic codes of conduct by preventing others from exercising their freedom to peacefully exchange ideas.

    During the talk, the speaker is the steward of the room, and the voice of authority within. Disrupting students should be promptly asked to leave the area, and if they fail to do so, they should be forcibly removed and face academic consequences. It is the duty of school administrators is to ensure everyone on campus treat all speakers with respect, and to protect every student’s right to hear all speakers.

  • RU_Serious

    Has anyone noticed who is absent from this thread? The SJWs and antifa fascists who try to stifle free speech at Berkeley. Because they have no actual arguments, and in this format they can’t surround you while chanting slogans like brainwashed zombies.

    • FreedomFan

      Antifa are neo-marxists who only know how to shut down speech. They are terrified of allowing their opponents to speak, because they know they could never win an argument.

  • roccolore

    Berkeley has invited terror apologists, Jew-haters, black supremacists, COmmunists, La Raza defenders, and Blame America Firsters to speak. No conservatives rioted.

    • RU_Serious

      Yeah but that’s different for reasons.

      • Timothy Smith

        How is it different?

        • RU_Serious

          Reasons.

          It’s a joke Timothy… I don’t think it’s different. But Berkeley will claim it is though they won’t be able to explain why to the court’s satisfaction.

  • SMH

    .

    HA-HA-HA-HA-HA!! — LOOKING AT THE LAWSUIT ABOVE — AT JUST THE 2ND PAGE!:

    YOU KNOW WHEN YOU — THE *PLAINTIFFS* –BCR — AND THEIR ATTORNEY — **STATE** — AND **ADMIT** — IN THEIR — THE BCR’s — LAWSUIT THAT THE UNIVERSITY IS **INDEED** RESPONDING TO A “FACELESS, RABID, OFF-CAMPUS MOB…AT THE CENTER OF CAMPUS DURING PRIME [*NIGHT*] TIME…”

    YOU — BCR — AND YOUR ATTORNEY — HAVE PRETTY MUCH *ALREADY* GIVEN YOUR *AMMUNITION* TO THE **UNIVERSITY** — AS TO THE UNIVERSITY’S SECURITY CONSIDERATIONS OF WHEN AND WHERE IT BELIEVES SUCH A SPEAKING EVENT SHOULD BE HELD!!

    — ESPECIALLY FOR A PURPOSELY **INCITEMENT** SPEAKER!!

    –ESPECIALLY WHEN THE UNIVERSITY HAS OFFERED A TIME ONLY 5 DAYS LATER!!

    THAT SOUNDS LIKE SOMETHING WRITTEN BY *TRUMP* — OR *COULTER* — THEMSELVES!!

    .

    • RU_Serious

      Not quite, the fact that Berkeley allows a riotous mob of modern-day brownshirts to storm the campus unopposed by any authority to stifle the free expression of conservatives is a key reason they will prevail.

      And do you know your caps lock key is stuck?

      • SMH

        .

        SO HOW’S THAT — [DEAD-END] — LAWSUIT COMING ALONG???

        I DON’T KNOW WHO’S MORE **INCOMPETENT**…, THE COLLEGE REPUGlicans OR THEIR ATTORNEY…

        FOR THE VERY REASON I STATED ABOVE!

        AND I’M NOT EVEN AN ATTORNEY!!

        AT LEAST THE ATTORNEY WAS **MMMILLLKINGGG** THE BCR’s $$$$$ ON THIS — [DEAD-END] — LAWSUIT — AND *MILKING* SOME LOCAL TV TIME TOO.

        HA-HA-HA!!

        .

        • RU_Serious

          How fast do you think lawsuits move in the US courts?

          And btw, your caps lock key is stuck and you write like a 12 year old.

          • SMH

            .
            OHHH, IF I WERE THE ATTORNEY FOR THE COLLEGE REPUGlicans…

            I’D MAKE **SURE** IT TOOK A **VVVERRRRRRYYY** **LLLLONGGGGG** **TIIIIIMMMMME**… … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … …

            SO I COULD KEEP RRRRACKIN’ UP MY BILLABLE HOURS ON THEM….

            AND GET PAID FOR A GRRRANNND EUROPEAN VACATION!!

            I’D **MMMILLLLK** THOSE COLLEGE REPUGlicans FOR BILLABLE HOURS LIKE THEY WERE A BUNCH OF FFATT PREGNANT COWS.

            CA-CHING!!…CA-CHINGG!!…CA-CHINGGG!! …CA-CHINGGGG!!…CA-CHCHINGGGGG … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … …

            HA-HA-HA…!!
            .

  • SMH

    .

    ANN COULTER SAID THAT THE FUKUSHIMA NUCLEAR CATASTROPHE’S RADIATION COULD IMMUNIZE ITS VICTIMS *AGAINST* **CANCER**!!?

    IS COULTER A ***LLOOONN***? — OR EVERY **NUTJOB** DESERVES TO HIJACK THE ATTENTION OF AN ENTIRE UNIVERSITY TOWN, AND SCORES/HUNDREDS OF COPS PROTECTING HER, AND THE HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS THAT COULD COST TAXPAYERS.

    *BUT*!! — WHEN AN ANOREXIC ULTRA-RIGHT-WING **BBIMBO** WENT TOO FAR — EVEN FOR **BILL O’REILLY**!!…:

    { On March 16, 2011, discussing the Fukushima I nuclear accidents, Coulter, citing research into radiation hormesis, wrote that there was “burgeoning evidence that excess radiation operates as a sort of cancer vaccine.” Her comments were criticized by figures across the political spectrum, [***EVEN***] from Fox News’ BILL O’REILLY (who told Coulter, “You have to be responsible …. in something like this, you gotta get the folks out of there, and you have to report worst-case scenarios”) to MSNBC’s Ed Schulz (who stated that “You would laugh at her if she wasn’t making light of a terrible tragedy.”) }

    THAT’S THE **NNUTTJOB** THE BERKELEY COLLEGE REPUGlicans THINKS IS SSSO **NECESSARY** & URGENTLY **DIRE** FOR THE UNIVERSITY COMMUNITY TO HEAR.

    (But, if she comes here, maybe — just maybe — the Berkeley College Repuglicans can lecture Coulter against committing all the PLAGIARISM she has been accused of by writers who’s words/materials she lifted.)

    .

    • SMH

      .

      *I* KNOW…!!…

      COULTER SHOULD RE-BILL HERSELF AS A **COMEDY** ACT!!

      BUH-DUH–BUH-DUH–BUH-DUH THAT’S **ALLL**, FOLKS!!!…

      HA-HA-HA…!!

      .

  • A case of just litigation. The aggrieved have a just complaint of discrimination not only from an educational institution, but from an instrument of the state government no less. The muzzling of free speech whatever the political affiliation by agents of the government should be chilling to anyone concerned with the constitutional rights guaranteed to citizens. There are serious constitutional questions at stake.

  • RU_Serious

    UCB is going to lose this lawsuit. Bigly.

  • FreedomFan

    Mr. Chancellor, I have a question: When your mob of leftist students constantly smear their fellow Americans as “racists”, “fascists” and “nazis”– is that forbidden “hate speech”?

    • Leonidas

      Very good point…

      • SMH

        .

        YEAHHH…, ON THE TOP OF “FreedomFan’s **HEAD**…!!

        HA-HA-HA…!!

        .

    • Iron Mike Houston

      The UCB administration uses their leftist students to control the university. Their popo has their hands tied. How many rioters did the popo arrest during Milo’s attempted speech?

  • Leonidas

    I find it interesting that UC Berkeley administrators & the UC Berkeley Police Department had no problems when the corrupt former president of Mexico Vincente Fox gave his speech. The Berkeley police were out in force and the people were safe.
    But yet, they want to put limits on the free-speech of conservatives. They say it is for “safety reasons” they always put conditions on conservatives first amendment rights.
    UC Berkeley says we have no problem with conservative speaking. We just have to get the security people come in and then they can have their speech. They try to act rational. And then they put on more conditions, and more conditions. This is a concerted effort to shut down speech of people that they do not approve of.

    • roccolore

      The fascist left has no problem inviting the following: terror apologists, Jew-haters, black supremacists, COmmunists, La Raza defenders, and Blame America Firsters

      • Leonidas

        You are absolutely right.
        They even recently, invited the corrupt former president of Mexico Vincente Fox. He hates America.

    • its censorship under a different name

      • Leonidas

        you are absolutely correct…

    • C Bierbauer78

      Care to stay on topic, you deflector?

  • Kurt VanderKoi

    UC Berkeley administrators, staff, and students should not have a problem with Ann Coulter speaking. After all domestic terrorist Black Lives Matter co-founder Alicia Garza spoke at the UC Berkeley School of Law lecture hall.

    “Black Lives Matter co-founder Alicia Garza speaks to UC Berkeley students”
    http://www.dailycal.org/2016/11/08/black-lives-matter-co-founder-alicia-garza-speaks-to-uc-berkeley-students/

    • C Bierbauer78

      Kurt is a liar.

  • Leonidas

    The lawyer for the UC Berkeley Republicans slams the absence of the ACLU in Ann Coulter’s speech …
    http://www.breitbart.com/california/2017/04/24/coulter-lawyer-berkeley-college-republicans-slams-aclu-ignoring-free-speech/

    • SMH

      .

      BREITBART…: ARE THOSE THE **ULTRA-RIGHT-WINGERS** THAT — UNLIKE THE BERKELEY COLLEGE REPUGLICANS — EVEN **MILO** — THE **PRO-/PEDOPHILE** ADVOCATE — WAS TOO MUCH FOR — AND DROPPED HIM LIKE A HOT POTATO???

      .

  • Leonidas

    I am glad that this lawsuit has been filed. It’s about time that the UC Berkeley administrators know that we’re not gonna take this garbage anymore.
    They cannot continue to violate the First Amendment rights of conservative Americans. This cannot stand.
    Ann Coulter should be allowed to speak on the 27th. And the UC Berkeley administration and UC Berkeley Police Department should see that everyone is safe for this event.
    Also David Horowitz and Milo should be re-invited to speak. The first amendment also applies to these people as well.
    Enough of these antifa snowflake thugs.
    The mayor of Berkley is also a member of antifa. Here is an article about the mayor.
    http://www.breitbart.com/tech/2017/04/21/berkeley-mayor-is-member-of-antifa-facebook-group-that-organized-riots/

    • Peter Dudley

      Who pays for the beefed up security? Coulter? BCR? The taxpayers of California? Perhaps the members of the audience? Or maybe you are so committed to the idea of free speech that you’ll pay for it yourself? Or perhaps you just expect the security staff to work extra hours without compensation.

      And if no one is willing to pay for the extra security, which right wins? Your right to hear a certain speaker, or your right to an expectation of safety? Can’t have it both ways, snowflake.

      • Leonidas

        UC Berkley is a public school. It receives state funds and federal funds. UC Berkley is responsible for all security requirements.
        The first amendment to the constitution is absolute. This right is guaranteed to all citizens. No exceptions.
        And for you to suggest that Ann Coulter should not be able to speak says a lot about you comrade.

        • Peter Dudley

          For you to say that I suggested Ann Coulter not speak says a lot about you. And aren’t you clever using the word “comrade” in addressing me.

          So I guess you are saying that the taxpayers of California and the United States are required to pay to have Ann Coulter to speak on the UC campus.

          I wonder if you have actually read the first amendment. I suspect, however, that you are so blinded by your dogma and your persecution complex that you see in it words and ideas that do not actually exist. As you did in my question to you about who pays for the beefed up security.

          • Leonidas

            The First amendment to the United States Constitution prohibits the making of any law respecting an establishment of religion, ensuring that there is no prohibition on the free exercise of religion, abridging the freedom of speech, infringing on the freedom of the press, interfering with the right to peaceably assemble, or prohibiting the petitioning for a governmental redress of grievances.

          • Peter Dudley

            You do realize that is not the actual text. Just checking whether you understand the difference between reading source material and reading the first link that Google returns.

          • Leonidas

            Oh I forgot…
            The way you would like the first amendment to read would be something like this…
            “All speech is accepted speech. Except speech by conservatives.”

            What happened to UC Berkeley? It was where the “free speech movement” was started. Now we have people such as you suggesting that shutting down speech that you don’t like is acceptable.
            I thought you
            liberal-progressives were accepting of all view points. I guess not.
            Now I understand how you feel Comrade

          • Leonidas

            I keep a small constitution book in my pocket and take it with me daily. I have read the US constitution & I understand it.

            UC Berkeley is a public institution. It receives state funding and Federal funding.
            These people have their First Amendment rights. These rights are absolute. Their constitutional rights cannot be denied.

            UC Berkeley used to be the home of the “free speech movement”. Not anymore.

            UC Berkley is mandated to protect the constitutional rights of people who want to speak.

            They cannot allow masked thugs to beat people up with metal pipes & spray them with mace.

            They cannot allow these thugs to prevent people like Ann Coulter, David Horwitz or Milo to speak.

            Nice try comrade. I’m not buying what you’re selling.

          • Peter Dudley

            Oh, that’s a mini Constitution in your pocket. I thought you were just excited to see Ann Coulter.

          • Leonidas

            Nice try comrade

          • SMH

            .

            HA-HA-HA-HA-HA — HA-HA…!!

            ***GGOOOD*** ONE…

            I *LIKED* THE NOTING OF — especially in their cases — **mini**…

            ———————————————–

            COULTER IS THEIR ULTRA-RIGHT-WING ANOREXIC FANTASY MILF (born 1961).

            .

      • In the long run it’s cheaper to have the taxpayers pay for security than it is to have them pay for the damage caused by rioting ANTIFAs.

        Also, you’re setting a dangerous precedent by implying that it is acceptable for terrorists to dictate what is and what is not acceptable speech at a publicly funded university. How would you feel if the Ku Klux Klan started shutting down every liberal speaker (including the professors in the classroom) by threatening to instigate violence? Would you still tolerate this state of affairs in the name of reducing security costs?

        • Leonidas

          Well Stated!
          We cannot allow these thugs & their friends at UC Berkeley to shut down speech…

        • Peter Dudley

          Actually, I’m discussing a different dangerous precedent–letting budget decisions decide what is and is not acceptable speech at a publicly funded university. But it is a practical question that needs to be addressed. One can’t just rant and rave about “free speech” and demand someone else pay for their right to spout whatever they want. We are a society of free speech, but we are also a society of free market, and people who wish to hear speakers that cost more are welcome to pay more for it. Which in itself is a danger of making free speech a privilege of the wealthy.

          As to the KKK shutting down the speech of a liberal speaker, I’d be opposed to it. I am opposed to the violent demonstrations making Coulter’s apperance more expensive to me, a taxpayer. I think a far more effective protest would be for those progressives to fill Coulter’s auditorium and stick their earbuds in to listen to NPR podcasts while she speaks to a room of people not listening to her. That would be a good protest.

          All y’all need to check your prejudices.

          For the record, I do not believe UC is stifling the free speech of Coulter or BCR. Coulter is able to speak in any number of venues, and her ideas can be found in her books and programs. The ideas she has, and the words she speaks, are not being stifled by the government or the university. The question here is not really one of free speech but one of unfair bias on the part of univerisity administration. The “free speech” tag is a red herring, meant to rile people up into a fit of indignation. There may or may not be merit to the claim of bias; I don’t know enough about the history of who has been denied access to campus venues to have an opinion on that.

          • “The “free speech” tag is a red herring, meant to rile people up into a fit of indignation. There may or may not be merit to the claim of bias; I don’t know enough about the history of who has been denied access to campus venues to have an opinion on that.”

            This free speech controversy is not a red herring, it is a direct threat to our democracy. Liberal academics are a corrupt secular priest class who are effectively functioning as the ideological arm of the democratic party. The social sciences and the humanities (and even some STEM fields) are being overrun with social justice ideology. The problem with social justice is that it is a pseudoscience whose tenets are philosophically absurd.

            It would not take long for the peer review process in a properly functioning university to invalidate social justice ideology. The problem is that there is no peer review process. Instead the corrupt secular priest class has opted to close off all avenues of dissent in the name of protecting students’ safety. They’re afraid of free speech on college campuses because it opens up the doorway for the scandal of social justice being exposed.

            I’m not exaggerating when I say this is a scandal. Social justice is compromising the curricula in universities all over the country, and maybe even all over the world. And it is well-documented that there is a long history of censorship towards critics of social justice on college campuses. Some of this censorship is unlawful (i.e. ANTIFA). Some violates the First Amendment. Much of it falls in a legal gray area. But all of it is unethical, and in the long run, undermines the credibility of the corrupt secular priest class.

          • SMH

            Matt Frohlich: “This free speech controversy is not a red herring, it is a direct threat to our democracy.”

            BUT ULTRA-RIGHT-WING WHITE-SUPREMACIST NATIONALISM — i.e., FACISM — TRYING TO “MAKE AMERICA *WHITE* AGAIN” — ISN’T…

            ————————————————————————————————————-

            WHITE SUPREMACIST NATHAN DAMIGO SUCKER-PUNCHED **WOMAN** AT TRUMP PROTEST

            .

          • roccolore

            Black Muslims like you are the fascist sand racists.

          • Leonidas

            You say that you worry about the cost for “security” at UC Berkeley when Ann Coulter comes. And how it will cost a lot of money.
            UC Berkeley police department does not protect conservatives. They allow conservatives to be beaten in the streets with iron pipes & to be maced. UC Berkeley police refuse to protect these people. UC Berkeley does not spend money on “security” for conservative events.

          • SMH

            .

            THOSE DAMN *COMMIE* COPS!! — HUH?

            .

          • roccolore

            Black Muslims like you hate cops, then beg for police to protect your terror mosques.

      • ESPM360

        YAF has entered into a contract where they have already paid for security (according to the above document filed in court). Part of the issue is UC coming up last minute with an additional security cost that are not stated. Part of the argument is “Why should there be any security charge when Berkeley PD will stand down and only interfere in life threatening situation?”

      • roccolore

        Democrats are the snowflakes who hate free speech.

    • SMH

      .

      Leonidas: “Also…Milo should be re-invited. The first amendment also applies to these people as well.”

      ‘YEAH’…, ‘**PRO-/PEDOPHILES** SHOULD BE GIVEN UNIVERSITY — AND EVEN PUBLIC GRADE SCHOOL — PLATFORMS TOO, TO ADVOCATE WHY *CHILDREN* SHOULD BE SEXUALLY PREYED UPON BY **SICKOS** (THAT WOULD BE MILO) AT *LEAST* _***3*** TIMES_ THE CHILDREN’S AGES — OR EVEN *MORE*!!’

      –EVEN THOUGH MILO’S RIGHT-WING PUBLISHER, *ULTRA*-RIGHT-WING FORMER EMPLOYER, AND A NATIONAL REPUBLICAN CONFERENCE *ALLL* DROPPED HIM TOO!

      WHY **AREN’T** THE BERKELEY COLLEGE REPUGLlicans GOING TO MAKE LOUD BOISTEROUS DEMANDS FOR MILO’S ‘FREEDOM OF SPEECH’ ON **THOSE** RIGHT-WINGERS — AND SUING *THEM* — TOO?

      MAYBE BECAUSE *THOSE* REPUBLICANS & EVEN *THOSE* ULTRA-RIGHT-WINGERS WOULD JUST TELL THE BCR TO F*CK-OFF…!!

      .

      • roccolore

        Black Muslims like you defend ISIS.

    • SMH

      .

      WHAT I DON’T UNDERSTAND IS **WHY** — IF ALLL THOSE ULTRA-RIGHT-WING RACIST WHITE-SUPREMACIST-NATIONALISTS HATE UC BERKELEY, HATE THE UC BERKELEY ADMINISTRATORS, HATE THE PEOPLE OF BERKELEY, AND OF COURSE THE MAYOR, SO MUCH — AND CALL US ALL “SNOWFLAKES”

      THEN **WHY** DO THOSE ULTRA-RIGHT-WINGERS –AND COULTER– WANT TO COME TO ***BERKELEY*** SO MUCH!!???

      I MEAN, *I DON’T* WANT TO GO TO ISRAEL –THE LAST WHITE-DOMINATED COLONIAL APARTHEID STATE OF ITS KIND IN THE WORLD (AFTER THE FALL OF APARTHEID IN SOUTH AFRICA)– OR TO SAUDI ARABIA — OR TO SOME ALL-WHITE SOUTHERN PRO-CONFEDERATE TOWN OR BAR — OR TO A KKK KLAVERN — OR TO A POLICE UNION — THE KKK IN BLUE — THE *BLUE*-KLUX KLAN — PICNIC…

      SO THEN WHY ARE ALLL THOSE ULTRA-RIGHT-WINGERS JUST DYING TO BE WITH *US* NORMAL, DECENT, MULTI-CULTURALLY-LOVING PEOPLE…?

      SADLY, AREN’T THERE ENOUGH OTHER PLACES THEY’D BE A LOT **HAPPIER** IN?

      .

      • roccolore

        Black Muslims like youare the KKK racists.

      • RU_Serious

        There’s apparently lots of things you don’t understand, such as how to turn off your caps lock. Do you realize posting in all caps makes you look like a raving lunatic?

        • SMH

          .

          IT’S THE **MAGGGIC** THAT IS *ME*…

          .

          • RU_Serious

            Are there some meds you forgot to take?

          • Leonidas

            No actually, it makes you
            look like a moron…

    • C Bierbauer78

      What’s new pussycat?

  • SMH

    .

    HEY attorney, Harmeet Dhillon, FOR THE COLLEGE REPUGlicans…!!

    I HOPE YOU’RE CHARGING **LLLOTTS** OF THEIR BCR MONEY TO WORK ON THIS **DEAD-END** LAWSUIT!!

    YOU OUGHT TO BE ABLE TO GET A **GGRRRANNND** SUMMER EUROPEAN VACATION IN THE FINEST HOTELS & AT THE FINEST RESTAURANTS OUT OF ATTORNEY BILLABLE HOURS ON *THIS* WORK.

    CHAMPAGNE ANYONE?…

    HA-HA-HA…!!

    .