you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 24 points 2 years ago (5 children)

Ah, technically no grounds for lawsuit. Protesting on the institution's private property was against their code of conduct. Hopefully people start withdrawing support for Harvard, leading to declining business.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 2 years ago (4 children)

    Lol bullshit. This board decision is literally unprecedented. Even in the face of previous student protests. It's a complete rug pull after a massive time and financial investment. I can't remember the name right now but that's 100 percent actionable in US courts.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] -2 points 2 years ago* (3 children)

    It certainly doesn't sound actionable, but if it is grounds for lawsuit because the faculty was overruled then I would be very supportive.

    Whether the board have overruled faculty before or not doesn't change the code of conduct which existed even before the protests, or the institution's ability to make decisions on ending business with students over their actions on the institution property. The fact that the school haven't acted against students in previous protests says nothing of their authority to do so.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    Found it, it's called Promissory Estoppel. Basically the University has not done this before and that creates a reasonable expectation, both because of a lack of precedent and because the majority of their marketing is that people who do the work and pay the money will get a degree.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments