Read on Twitter
a thread on the role of law and the federal government in cultural change
caveat emptor I have no idea what I am talking about and you should not believe me
caveat emptor I have no idea what I am talking about and you should not believe me
theoretically the text of the constitution prevents the federal government from punishing you for all sorts of things, at least when its not getting calvinballed by creative supreme court rulings
however in practice there are plenty of ways for it to force interesting outcomes
however in practice there are plenty of ways for it to force interesting outcomes
an older example of this is the drinking age in the united states
theoretically speaking this is a matter reserved for the states, and in earlier years 18 was a common drinking age
in practice, however, the federal government mandates a minimum age of 18 years
how can this be?
theoretically speaking this is a matter reserved for the states, and in earlier years 18 was a common drinking age
in practice, however, the federal government mandates a minimum age of 18 years
how can this be?
well, states can still set the drinking age to 18 or to whatever it likes
and if they do this, the federal government will simply slash the money they send to states to pay for highways
go ahead states! good luck
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Minimum_Drinking_Age_Act
and if they do this, the federal government will simply slash the money they send to states to pay for highways
go ahead states! good luck
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Minimum_Drinking_Age_Act
this is common.
the current federal system is partly an enormous redistribution mechanism
youve seen the figures about how it takes money from relatively wealthy areas and redistributes it to poorer areas, but the net for any particular area doesnt matter for this thread
the current federal system is partly an enormous redistribution mechanism
youve seen the figures about how it takes money from relatively wealthy areas and redistributes it to poorer areas, but the net for any particular area doesnt matter for this thread
rather, what matters is that it pulls money from everywhere and returns it everywhere
if
if, your well behaved
otherwise it just takes the money of your citizens
if
if, your well behaved
otherwise it just takes the money of your citizens
now, this sort of thing along with rampant abuse of the commerce clause over the last hundred years let's it get around the fact that per 10A states are supposed to have superior latitude in most cases
but this doesnt let them get at individuals, bc of the incorporation doctrine
but this doesnt let them get at individuals, bc of the incorporation doctrine
so how do you wreck individuals?
well there are Other Ways and i have my suspicions about how such a system operates, deliberately or not
(i believe it was not intended in this case, but once the mechanism was identified--!)
well there are Other Ways and i have my suspicions about how such a system operates, deliberately or not
(i believe it was not intended in this case, but once the mechanism was identified--!)
my hunch is that many such impositions operate through incentives working on private entities that do not _force_ them to do anything that, if done by governments would be unconstitutional; but effectively punish them if they do not do these things
lets consider one such case, title ix
in its aim, its pretty unobjectionable
dont be a dick to ladies if your a school
that cool
and also pay attention to the mechanism:
". . . receiving Federal financial assistance."
in its aim, its pretty unobjectionable
dont be a dick to ladies if your a school
that cool
and also pay attention to the mechanism:
". . . receiving Federal financial assistance."
So thats fine
If you want to be a Discriminatory just give up your cash right?
Thats what one college thought and the supreme court agreed
but
uh oh
If you want to be a Discriminatory just give up your cash right?
Thats what one college thought and the supreme court agreed
but
uh oh
Ok so basically if you want to have a school you need to comply with this Act because good luck running a uni without NIH/NHS grants and without students mortgaging their futures through the department of education
Ok fine
What are the details like? Surely is unobjectionable
Ok fine
What are the details like? Surely is unobjectionable
Well
Ok
Turns out regulators implemented a test that mandated equal participation for men and women in athletics
Little cack-handed and invasive but not like
Bad bad right
Just killed off a bunch of less popular mens sports
Ok
Turns out regulators implemented a test that mandated equal participation for men and women in athletics
Little cack-handed and invasive but not like
Bad bad right
Just killed off a bunch of less popular mens sports
But whats this?
The government will always find a mechanism to make people do things if granted power to do so, by hook or crook
i wonder what the bush 2 administration got up to!
The government will always find a mechanism to make people do things if granted power to do so, by hook or crook
i wonder what the bush 2 administration got up to!
and of course the Obama administration had its own trick's to play
in summary, a letter sent to universities from the Ed sec (1) stipulated that schools could be sued if they permitted a "hostile environment," and (2) set atrocious rules for university quasijudicial inquiries
in summary, a letter sent to universities from the Ed sec (1) stipulated that schools could be sued if they permitted a "hostile environment," and (2) set atrocious rules for university quasijudicial inquiries
I don't mean to comment on the validity of the object level policies. Rather, I want to point out that using concepts of a "hostile environment" or simple regulatory policy the Federal government was able to force universities to do things that the government itself cannot
Some schools surely would have liked to comply with these regulations; others would not. Again, ignoring the base issues, I think one must agree that the government is using private actors to implement policies it could not itself (esp. w.r.t. anti-defendent judicial standards).
Title IX and Its Consequences have been done to death in commentary, although lately forgotten. Nevertheless it has I think played a tremendous role in the culture and structure of American higher education since its passage. *Good or bad*: the effect, was had.
Having considered this illustrative case (about which I knew in advance) im going to test a hypothesis about another branch of law and its role in the Cancel Crisis.
I have no significant knowledge of this area so I will be reading a lot of wikipedia as I post
I have no significant knowledge of this area so I will be reading a lot of wikipedia as I post
I am doing this exercise because I want to publicly test this out of sample prediction which seems like a fun way of keeping myself honest.
Let's gooooooooooooo
Let's gooooooooooooo
Hypothesis: one of cancel culture's sine qua non, mechanistically, is anti-discrimination regulations in the workplace
Test: wont be complete but look for implementation and case law around "hostile environments" and various Bad behaviors and see what's covered
Test: wont be complete but look for implementation and case law around "hostile environments" and various Bad behaviors and see what's covered
Here's the opening salvo.
Most cases listed here relate to sexual harassment, which doesn't surprise me for boring reasons.
Note the mechanism: creating a liability for the employer if they fail to prevent a thing
Rule of thumb: companies do not want to get sued
Most cases listed here relate to sexual harassment, which doesn't surprise me for boring reasons.
Note the mechanism: creating a liability for the employer if they fail to prevent a thing
Rule of thumb: companies do not want to get sued
I do not know the history of HR departments but I would bet they came into being to comply with these laws.
People have noted the shared culture of universities and HR. I think it might make sense to think of these as compliance offices. (Probably trite.)
People have noted the shared culture of universities and HR. I think it might make sense to think of these as compliance offices. (Probably trite.)
The wiki is tragically short (for such a concept!) but this is interesting to me: law on this matter varies by jurisdiction
(I assume a baseline federal law and additions made by locals?)
Having panel data here would be very interesting. Free econometrics paper idea (must cite)
(I assume a baseline federal law and additions made by locals?)
Having panel data here would be very interesting. Free econometrics paper idea (must cite)
actually more generally if you write a paper and cite my tweet in the acknowledgements section you should absolutely let me know so I can lose my mind
Further wiki walking my suspicion is that Title VII of the civil rights act (1964) is the national standard I speculated about earlier
heres the rundown
heres the rundown
there are narrow exceptions given for super specific cases that I imagine are things like casting a Soomerian actor to play Zuul
Note that religious preferences are not acceptable!
The first scene of the Mary Tyler Moore Show preserves this transition in amber. It must have been a bewildering time for everyone.
The first scene of the Mary Tyler Moore Show preserves this transition in amber. It must have been a bewildering time for everyone.
Skipping around and getting a little bored
Noted the disparate impact issue, which I'd forgotten about and which has led to this curious finding
Also old people are less protected than other classes (if you curious where old people stood on the status hierarchy)
Noted the disparate impact issue, which I'd forgotten about and which has led to this curious finding
Also old people are less protected than other classes (if you curious where old people stood on the status hierarchy)
anyway my hunch is the following. (I'd need to read case law to be sure and I'm not doing that)
1. Being known to be bigoted in some sense makes someone a walking liability
2. What a Reasonable Person (relevant standard) would find to be workplace harassment has been expanding
1. Being known to be bigoted in some sense makes someone a walking liability
2. What a Reasonable Person (relevant standard) would find to be workplace harassment has been expanding
3. Large organizations fire people who develop a reputation as a bigot at the drop of a hat because of (1) if nothing else
4. (2) + (3) ===> you're done if you get the spotlight because firms dont know what the standard is and they don't want to be the test case
4. (2) + (3) ===> you're done if you get the spotlight because firms dont know what the standard is and they don't want to be the test case
Basically I am speculating that the government is generating the Cancel Crisis through extremely boring administrative law that most Americans know nothing about.
I am skeptical of any improvement because it is from the Civil Rights Act and no way is anyone touching that
I am skeptical of any improvement because it is from the Civil Rights Act and no way is anyone touching that
contemplate this on the Tree of Woe
Upon reading the summary of this text I was
1. glad to be validated (kind of)
2. glad someone had gone through the bother of writing a book
3. glad to not buy it because it would only depress me https://twitter.com/herandrews/status/1276692215293763584?s=19
1. glad to be validated (kind of)
2. glad someone had gone through the bother of writing a book
3. glad to not buy it because it would only depress me https://twitter.com/herandrews/status/1276692215293763584?s=19
comment from Alex, I think the first counterpoint is a pretty good one https://twitter.com/AlexGodofsky/status/1276696122350866432?s=19
epigrammatical! https://twitter.com/AlexGodofsky/status/1276698837739089922?s=19
I do think this is the most compelling counter to this thread's idea.
Hm.
There's a synthesis but I want to play vidya, I leave it as an exercise for the reader
Hm.
There's a synthesis but I want to play vidya, I leave it as an exercise for the reader
oh also, I love this: @nicholatian gives us another case study, from Indonesia https://twitter.com/nicholatian/status/1276692329282310149?s=19
adding another to the college control stack
as usual I have nothing to say about the object level issue and only note the mechanism for government exercising control https://twitter.com/AbigailShrier/status/1352121732723666946?s=19
as usual I have nothing to say about the object level issue and only note the mechanism for government exercising control https://twitter.com/AbigailShrier/status/1352121732723666946?s=19
