% >>> WELCOME TO "NOON WEDNESDAY,"
% I'M MARISA WOJCIK, MULTIMEDIA
% JOURNALIST WITH "HERE & NOW" ON
% PBS WISCONSIN, AND TODAY IS
% JANUARY 12.
% SO OVER THE LAST YEAR, DEBATE
% OVER WHETHER AND HOW TO DISCUSS
% RACE IN CLASSROOMS HAS TAKEN
% OVER SCHOOL BOARD MEETINGS AND
% IS THREATENING TO UPEND COLLEGE
% CURRICULA.
% NOW REPUBLICAN BILLS BEFORE THE
% WISCONSIN STATE LEGISLATURE ARE
% SEEKING TO PUT LIMITS ON HOW
% RACE DISCUSSIONS HAPPEN IN
% CLASSROOMS INTO LAW.
% SO JOINING ME TO BET WITHER
% UNDERSTAND WHAT -- BETTER
% UNDERSTAND WHAT THIS COULD MEAN
% ARE TWO PROFESSORS FROM THE
% UNIVERSITY LAW SCHOOL, STEPH TAI
% ON THE FACULTY WITH UW
% CROSSE, AND ANUJ DESAI FOCUSES
% ON THE FIRST AMENDMENT IN
% INTELLECTUAL FREEDOM, AND THANK
% YOU, BOTH, FOR THE CONVERSATION
% TODAY.%>> THANK YOU FOR HAVIN
G US.
% >> THANKS.
% YEAH, THANKS VERY MUCH FOR
% HAVING US.
% WE'RE THRILLED TO BE HERE.
% >> SO TO START OFF, THERE ARE
% TWO DIFFERENT PIECES OF
% LEGISLATION.
% ONE IS FOR K-12 PUBLIC AND
% CHARTER SCHOOLS; THE OTHER
% TARGETED AT UW SYSTEM AND
% TECHNICAL COLLEGES.
% THEY BOTH SAY THAT INSTRUCTION
% OR TRAINING IS PROHIBITED TO
% DISCUSS, QUOTE, THAT ONE SEX OR
% RACE IS INHERENTLY SUPERIOR TO
% ANOTHER SEX OR RACE, AND THAT BY
% VIRTUAL OF THE INDIVIDUALS, RACE
% OR SEX BEARS RESPONSIBILITY FOR
% THE ACTS COMMITTED IN THE PAST
% BY OTHER INDIVIDUALS OF THE SAME
% RACE OR SEX.
% SO THAT'S KIND OF A MEATY
% STATEMENT.
% ANUJ, CAN YOU EXPLAIN TO US WHAT
% THAT IS SAYING AND WHY, IN YOUR
% MIND, THIS IS A FREEDOM OF
% SPEECH ISSUE?%>> YEAH.
% WELL, LET ME JUST START BY
% THANKING YOU FOR RAISING THESE
% ISSUES BEFORE THE PUBLIC, AND I
% JUST WANTED TO, YOU KNOW, THANK
% THE AUDIENCE FOR SHOWING
% INTEREST IN THESE ISSUES.
% SO THE FIRST THING, I GUESS I
% WOULD SAY, IS, SO THE BILLS ARE
% FRAMED IN A WAY THAT PROHIBITS
% ALLOWING TEACHERS TO TEACH RACE
% OR SEX STEREOTYPING.
% SO THAT'S THE BIG PICTURE
% CATEGORY THAT IS BEING
% PROHIBITED, AND THEN IT SAYS,
% INCLUDING CERTAIN ENUMERATED
% CONCEPTS, AND THEN, YOU KNOW,
% THE ONES YOU JUST LISTED OFF
% THERE, ARE TWO OF THE EXAMPLES
% IN THE SORT OF LIST OF SORT OF
% PROHIBITED CONCEPTS.
% SO WHY IS THIS A FREE SPEECH
% ISSUE?
% IT IS A FREE SPEECH ISSUE IN
% PART BECAUSE WHEN WE THINK
% LARGELY ABOUT FREE SPEECH IN OUR
% SOCIETY, WE HAVE INSTITUTIONS%
THAT ARE DESIGNED TO FURTHER
% BROADEN IDEAS ABOUT FREE SPEECH,
% AND TWO OF THE BIG ONES ARE K-12
% SCHOOLS AND THE UNIVERSITIES,
% AND SO ANYTHING, REALLY, THAT
% IMPLICATES THE CONTENT OF
% DISCUSSION IN CLASSROOMS IS
% GOING TO IMPLICATE OUR
% CONCEPTION OF FREE SPEECH.
% >> AND WE'LL GET TO THE
% DISTINCTION BETWEEN K-12 SCHOOLS
% AND UNIVERSITIES IN A MINUTE,
% BUT, FIRST, STEPH, SPECIFICALLY
% IN THE SETTING OF HIGHER
% EDUCATION, YOU ARE A PART OF A
% GROUP CALLED UW THAT REPRESENTS
% FACULTY IN FRONT OF LEGISLATIVE
% BODIES AND THE BOARD OF REGIONS,
% SO WHY DOES YOUR GROUP TAKE
% ISSUE WITH THIS LEGISLATION
% BANNING THE DISCUSSION OF RACE
% AND SEX ON COLLEGE CAMPUSES IN
% THIS WAY?
% >> WELL, WE REPRESENT THE UW
% FACULTY MEMBERS, AND ONE OF THE
% THINGS THAT WE REPRESENT IS THE
% ACADEMIC FREEDOM OF VARIOUS%
PROFESSORS THROUGHOUT THE
% UNIVERSITY SYSTEM.
% THERE ARE CERTAIN THREATS TO
% ACADEMIC FREEDOM POSED BY THE
% BILLS IN THAT THE BILLS ARE
% STRUCTURED, SEEMS FINE IN
% GENERAL, BUT THEY COULD HAVE A
% CHILLING EFFECT ON DISCUSSIONS,
% RIGHT?
% SO THE CONCERN IS ONE MIGHT BE
% TALKING ABOUT THE HISTORY OF THE
% UNITED STATES, AND THAT MIGHT
% LEAD TO STUDENTS FEELING BACK,
% RIGHT, ABOUT THEIR PARTICULAR
% KIND OF HISTORIES.
% NOW, THAT WOULD NOT NECESSARILY
% BE THE INTENT OF THE PROFESSOR,
% BUT THE MERE FACT A STUDENT
% MIGHT FEEL BAD MEANS THEY COULD
% MAYBE RAISE A LAWSUIT AGAINST
% THE UNIVERSITY, AND THUS,
% OVERALL, CREATES A CHILLING
% EFFECT ON WHAT FACULTY MEMBERS
% MIGHT FEEL FREE TO SAY.
% FOR EXAMPLE, I MIGHT TALK IN MY
% PRE-LAW CLASS ABOUT THE HISTORY
% OF DISCRIMINATION BY THE USDA,
% AND THIS WAS ACKNOWLEDGED BY THE
% USDA IN A LAWSUIT WHICH IT
% SETTLED AGAINST BLACK FARMERS.
% THEY HAD HAD A WHOLE HISTORY OF
% ACTUAL INTENTIONAL%DISCRIMINA
TION THAT THE USDA
% ACKNOWLEDGED.
% THIS MIGHT LEAD STUDENTS TO FEEL
% BAD, FOR EXAMPLE, ABOUT THIS
% PARTICULAR HISTORY, AND WOULD
% THIS FALL OVER THE LINE OF THIS
% BILL?
% IT'S HARD TO KNOW, AND IT MIGHT
% LEAD TO SORT OF FRIVOLOUS
% POTENTIAL LAWSUITS, BUT STILL
% LAWSUITS THAT CREATE A CHILLING
% EFFECT.
% MOREOVER, IT HAS -- IT HAS AN
% EFFECT ON THE RECRUITMENT OF
% BOTH FACULTY MEMBERS AND
% GRADUATE STUDENTS WHO MIGHT --
% ESPECIALLY THOSE WHO HAVE TO
% TEACH IN CLASSROOMS.
% THEY MIGHT BE CONCERNED ABOUT
% BEING ABLE TO ENGAGE IN THE
% KINDS OF TEACHING THAT THEY WANT
% TO BE ABLE TO DO BECAUSE, AGAIN,
% OF THE CHILLING EFFECT, AND THAT
% MEANS THAT WE'RE GOING TO HAVE
% TO RECRUIT AS A UNIVERSITY
% SYSTEM FROM A SMALLER POOL OF
% FACULTY, AND THUS LEAD US TO BE
% LESS COMPETITIVE AS A
% UNIVERSITY.
% >> AND THAT'S INTERESTING THAT
% YOU BRING UP EVEN JUST TEACHING
% ABOUT THE HISTORY, SO IT COULD
% HAVE THE CHILLING EFFECT AND
% STIFLE INSTRUCTORS' ABILITY TO
% TEACH ABOUT THE UNITED STATES'
% HISTORY, WHICH INCLUDES
% DISCRIMINATION.
% ANUJ, IS THERE A DIFFERENCE OF
% PROHIBITING THIS IN K-12 SCHOOLS
% VERSUS IN A HIGHER EDUCATION
% UNIVERSITY SETTING?
% >> YES.
% SO THE SHORT ANSWER IS
% ABSOLUTELY, YES.
% SO I DO -- BEFORE I ANSWER IT
% DIRECTLY, I JUST DO WANT TO, YOU
% KNOW, PICK UP ON ONE THEME THAT
% PROFESSOR TAI RAISED, AND THAT
% IS THIS QUESTION OF WHAT WE, YOU
% KNOW, FIRST AMENDMENT LAWYERS
% REFER TO AS THE CHILLING EFFECT.
% THERE ARE CERTAIN THINGS THAT
% THE LAW MIGHT PROHIBIT THAT WE
% ACTUALLY MIGHT ALL AGREE IT
% OUGHT TO PROHIBIT PEOPLE FROM
% SAYING, WHETHER IN K-12 OR IN
% UNIVERSITIES, AND, YOU KNOW, AS
% PROFESSOR TAI POINTED OUT, THE
% BIG QUESTION HERE, I THINK, IS,
% YOU KNOW, WELL, YOU KNOW, AGAIN,
% LAWYERS CALL AN "INTERPRETIVE
% QUESTION."
% WHAT EXACTLY IS MEANT, AND, YOU
% KNOW, AS SHE WAS INDICATING, THE
% QUESTION ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT
% CERTAIN THINGS, CERTAIN
% DISCUSSIONS MIGHT FALL INTO THE
% STATUTE.%I THINK IF WE, YOU K
NOW, STEP
% BACK FOR A SECOND, I THINK, YOU
% KNOW, OVERALL, IF YOU LOOK AT
% THE WAY THE LEGISLATION HAS COME
% THROUGH, YOU COULD, YOU KNOW, IF
% YOU WERE INCLINED, ACCUSE THOSE
% WHO HAVE INTRODUCED IT OF TRYING
% TO DO JUST THAT.
% THAT IS SUPPRESS DISCUSSION
% ABOUT RACE IN GENERAL, BUT IF
% WE, YOU KNOW, I THINK IF WE TAKE
% THOSE LEGISLATORS AT THEIR WORD,
% WE CAN IMAGINE A SORT OF
% NARROWING INTERPRETATION THAT%
SORT OF GOES BACK TO SORT OF
% WHERE YOU STARTED US WITH THE
% BILL, AND THAT IT'S PROHIBITING
% THINGS LIKE, YOU KNOW, TEACHING
% THAT ONE RACE IS INHERENTLY
% SUPERIOR TO ANOTHER RACE, RIGHT?
% AND THOSE ARE THINGS THAT, YOU
% KNOW, IF THOUGHT OF IN, YOU
% KNOW, SORT OF, YOU KNOW, IN
% THEIR LITERAL WAY SEEM
% UNOBJECTIONABLE, RIGHT?
% SO I THINK ONE THING TO BE
% THINKING ABOUT IN THIS WHOLE
% DISCUSSION IS HOW MUCH OF A
% CHILL ARE LAWS LIKE THIS
% ACTUALLY GOING TO HAVE?
% LET ME GO NOW TO YOUR, YOU KNOW,
% DIRECTLY TO YOUR QUESTION
% WITHOUT ABOUT K-12 VERSUS
% COLLEGES.
% SO, THE SHORT ANSWER IS IN THE
% K-12 CONTEXT, THE GOVERNMENT HAS
% ALMOST SORT OF COMPLETE
% DISCRETION TO SET THE TERMS OF
% EDUCATION UNDER THE FIRST
% AMENDMENT.
% THERE ARE SOME LIMITS, AND SO
% ONE THAT MIGHT BE RELEVANT HERE
% IS, YOU KNOW, THE COURTS HAVE
% INDICATED THAT IF EDUCATION
% CURRICULUM IS DONE IN A NAKEDLY
% PARTISAN WAY, THAT THAT MIGHT --
% THAT MIGHT VIOLATE THE FIRST
% AMENDMENT, BUT, YOU KNOW, THE
% COURTS HAVE NEVER FOUND THIS, SO
% THAT SORT OF INDICATED THAT
% WOULD BE THE CASE, BUT HAVE
% NEVER ACTUALLY HELD SOMETHING TO
% BE NAKEDLY PARTISAN WHEREAS, YOU
% KNOW, AS PROFESSOR TAI WAS
% MENTIONING, IN THE COLLEGE AND
% UNIVERSITY PERSPECTIVE, YOU
% KNOW, AREAS, TEACHERS HAVE JUST
% A LOT MORE LEEWAY, I GUESS IS
% WHAT I WOULD SAY, TO EXPRESS
% THEIR OWN VIEWS ABOUT THINGS,
% AND THAT IS THAT CONCEPT OF
% ACADEMIC FREEDOM, WHICH
% INTERTWINES WITH FREEDOM OF
% SPEECH AND IS PART AND PARCEL TO
% IT IN CONSTITUTIONAL LAW.
% >> AND, STEPH, THERE IS A LONG
% LIST OF WORDS AND PHRASES LISTED
% IN ADDENDUM TO THIS LEGISLATION
% THAT WAS AUTHORED BY
% REPRESENTATIVE WICKERS, AND HE
% ADDS THAT PROHIBITING CERTAIN
% WORDS LIKE "SOCIAL JUSTICE,"
% "EQUITY," "ANTIRACISM," "WOKE,"
% "INTERSECTIONALTY" JUST TO NAME
% A FEW, BUT IT IS A VERY, VERY
% LONG LIST.
% IF THOSE WORDS ARE USED IN THE
% CONTEXT OF THIS LEGISLATION,
% THOSE WOULD ALSO BE PROHIBITED.
% WHAT'S YOUR REACTION TO THAT?
% >> WELL, THIS ACTUALLY GOES TO
% SOMETHING THAT WAS MENTIONED.
% THIS IS ALL GOING TO BE UP TO
% THE INTERPRETATION OF COURTS,
% AND THE EFFECT OF THIS IS GOING
% TO BE THAT EVEN THOUGH IT'S NOT
% IN THE LEGISLATION, ITSELF, IT
% IS AN INTERPRETIVE TOOL.
% SO ONE OF THE RULES OF STATUTORY
% INTERPRETATION IS THAT SOME OF
% THE LEGISLATIVE DEBATE AND
% AUTHORS' INTENT GOES INTO THE
% INTERPRETATION OF THAT, AND SO
% WHILE NOT ACTUALLY IN THE
% STATUTE, ITSELF, THESE WORDS
% WOULD BE USED BY JUDGES TO
% FIGURE OUT THE SCOPE OF THE
% BILL, RIGHT?
% WHETHER IT IS INTERPRETED
% BROADLY TO INCLUDE MANY
% DIFFERENT TYPES OF THINGS, THUS
% COVERING A LARGER SET OF THINGS,
% VERSUS INTERPRETED NARROWLY.
% I DO WANT TO GO BACK TO ONE
% THING THAT WAS MENTIONED THAT
% WHILE COURTS HAVE NOT HELD
% THAT -- THAT REJECTED BILL THAT
% LIMITED THE SCOPE OF CURRICULUM
% DUE TO ENTIRELY PARTISAN
% REASONS, THERE WAS A CASE IN
% ARIZONA WHERE GONZALEZ V.
% DOUGLAS, DID OVERTURN A BAN ON
% ETHIC STUDIES IN ARIZONA
% REACHING K-12 TO COLLEGES
% BECAUSE IT WAS BASED ON RACIALLY
% DISCRIMINATED -- RACIALLY AN
% MOUSE, AND THEY LEARNED THAT IN
% THE LEGISLATIVE HISTORY, AND SO
% THERE'S SMALL EXCEPTIONS, AND A%
LOT OF THIS IS GOING TO DEPEND
% ON WHAT THE LEGISLATORS SAY AND
% DO AND ALL OF THIS KIND OF
% INTERPRETATIONAL STUFF.
% >> AND PROFESSOR DESAI, THERE'S
% LAWSUITS ABOUT THE LEGISLATION
% PENDING.
% CAN YOU DESCRIBE WHAT YOU KNOW
% ABOUT THOSE LAWSUITS?
% >> SURE, YEAH.
% SO, LET ME BACK UP.
% SO, THIS IS, RIGHT KNOW, IN
% WISCONSIN AT LEAST, THESE ARE
% JUST BILLS.
% THEY ARE NOT LAWS.
% THERE'S NO LAWSUITS ABOUT THEM
% BECAUSE THEY ARE NOT THE LAW,
% AND MAYBE WE'LL TALK ABOUT THIS
% LATER.
% IT DOESN'T SEEM HIGHLY LIKELY
% THAT THEY WILL BECOME LAW
% BECAUSE I THINK THE GOVERNOR
% ALSO IS, YOU KNOW, A FORMER
% SUPERINTENDENT OF PUBLIC
% INSTRUCTION HERE HAS EFFECTIVELY
% INDICATED THAT HE WILL VETO THEM
% IF THEY COME BEFORE HIM.
% BUT THERE ARE A LOT OF SIMILAR
% LAWS THAT OTHER STATES HAVE
% PASSED AT THIS POINT, AND SO
% SOME OF THOSE LAWS HAVE BEEN
% CHALLENGED.
% ONE IN OKLAHOMA I KNOW OF, ONE
% IN NEW HAMPSHIRE I KNOW OF, AND
% THERE MAY BE OTHERS.
% I'M AFRAID I'M NOT UP ON ALL THE
% LATEST, BUT THERE ARE PROBABLY
% ABOUT, I WOULD SAY, ABOUT A
% DOZEN OTHER STATES THAT HAVE
% PASSED LAWS THAT ARE SIMILAR TO
% THIS.
% I WILL SAY ONE THING THAT -- I'M
% NOT 100% SURE THE LAWSUITS HAVE
% DONE, BUT MAY BE CONTRIBUTING TS
% HAPPENED SINCE THESE BILLS WERE
% INTRODUCED, AND YOU REFERRED
% EARLIER TO THAT LIST OF WORDS
% THAT WAS ATTACHED, YOU KNOW,
% INITIALLY BACK IN JULY OR AUGUST
% OF 2021, BUT SINCE THEN, THERE
% HAVE BEEN AMENDMENTS, AND THE
% AMENDMENTINGS HAVE, YOU KNOW,
% PASSED IN THE COMMITTEE, AND
% THOSE AMENDMENTS REALLY HAVE
% NARROWED THE WISCONSIN BILLS
% KIND OF SIGNIFICANTLY COMPARED
% WITH A BUNCH OF THE OTHER STATES
% THAT HAVE PASSED LEGISLATION.
% SO, YOU KNOW, YOU CAN THINK, YOU
% KNOW, FOR THOSE OF US WHO CARE
% ABOUT THE KIND OF LEGISLATIVE
% AND BROADER LEGAL PROCESS, YOU
% CAN THINK OF THIS ALL AS PART OF
% KIND OF NATIONAL DISCUSSIONS
% THAT, YOU KNOW, THAT WE, AS A
% COUNTRY, ARE HAVING ABOUT, YOU
% KNOW, THE ROLE OF K-12 SCHOOLS
% AND COLLEGES IN KIND OF RACE
% RELATED EDUCATION.
% >> AND, PROFESSOR TAI, ALONG
% THOSE LINES, I MEAN, WHAT DO YOU
% THINK THESE BILLS ARE ACTUALLY
% SAYING?
% THEY'RE LARGELY, AS PROFESSOR
% DESAI JUST SAID, PART OF THIS
% BIG POLITICAL MOVEMENT, AND
% THERE'S SOME CONSERVATIVES
% SAYING THIS IS -- THAT THERE'S
% NOW REVERSE DISCRIMINATION
% HAPPENING, AND IT IS GETTING
% TWISTED.%YOU KNOW, THEY ARE T
RYING TO BAN
% CRITICAL RACE THEORY
% SPECIFICALLY, SOMETHING THAT'S
% NOT EVEN TAUGHT IN K-12 SCHOOLS.
% WHAT IS YOUR REACTION TO KIND OF
% ALL OF THIS DISCOURSE SWIRLING
% AROUND THAT'S NOW CREATING REAL
% PROPOSED LEGISLATION?
% >> I THINK PART OF IT IS JUST --
% I DON'T WANT TO USE A HARSH A
% WORD AS THIS, BUT FEAR
% MONGERING, RIGHT?%IT IS USIN
G SOME SORT OF SPECTER
% TO DRIVE OUT VOTES IN PARTICULAR
% DIRECTION.
% AGAIN, I USE THIS WORD "FEAR
% MONGERING," EVEN THOUGH RIGHT
% NOW, THERE SHOULD BE A BETTER
% WORD FOR THIS, BECAUSE CRITICAL
% RACE THEORY IS NOT TAUGHT IN
% K-12.
% IT IS NOT EVEN TAUGHT IN
% COLLEGES.%IT IS KIND OF BEIN
G TAUGHT AS A
% VERY THIN SLICE OF LAW SCHOOL,%
BUT THAT'S IT.
% IT'S NOT AN ACTUAL THING THAT
% PEOPLE ARE TEACHING, ALTHOUGH,
% IN THE PROPOSED BILL THEY WERE
% TALKING ABOUT THIS AS A SORT OF
% GENERALIZED TERM, IT IS ACTUALLY
% A VERY SPECIFIC TERM WITH A
% CONCRETE LEGAL HISTORY, AND SO I
% THINK THAT'S WHERE SOME OF THIS
% IS COMING FROM.%ANOTHER PART
OF THIS IS ALSO
% POTENTIAL FOR LAWSUITS.
% SO, THERE ARE ORGANIZATIONS THAT
% MAKE -- GET SIZABLE ATTORNEYS'
% FEES FROM SUITS LIKE THIS
% BECAUSE THIS BILL, EVEN THOUGH
% IT'S NOT PASSED YET, THIS BILL
% WOULD GRANT ATTORNEYS' FEES FOR
% ANYONE REPRESENTING COMPLAINTS
% ABOUT THIS TEACHING.
% THEY ARE NOT LIMITED TO THE
% CLASS.
% THEY ARE ANY STUDENT OR STAFF
% MEMBER OF A UNIVERSITY.
% THIS PROVIDES A BROAD POOL OF
% PROBABLY CLAIMANTS WHO MIGHT GET
% ATTORNEY REPRESENTATION BY%AT
TORNEYS WHO WANT TO SEEK
% ATTORNEYS' FEES IN SOME WAY.
% WHAT THIS MEANS, THOUGH, IS THAT
% THIS IS ACTUALLY A HIDDEN TAX ON
% WISCONSIN VOTERS.
% THE TAXES ARE NOT PAID OUT OF
% THE UNIVERSITY'S SYSTEM OR THE
% K-12 SYSTEM.
% THEY ARE PAID BY US.
% OUR INCOME TAXES.
% THIS IS A HIDDEN PART OF THE
% AGENDA, I THINK, THAT IS NOT
% REALLY DISCUSSED VERY MUCH.
% >> AND THIS LAST QUESTION IS FOR
% BOTH OF YOU, AND, PROFESSOR
% DESAI, I'LL ASK YOU FIRST.
% EVEN IF THE ASSEMBLY AND SENATE
% PASS THIS LEGISLATION, WHICH IS
% LIKELY, IT'LL BE SENT TO THE
% GOVERNOR'S DESK, AND AS YOU%
ALREADY MENTIONED, HE'S LIKELY
% TO VETO IT ALL TOGETHER, SO WHAT
% DOES THIS TYPE OF LEGISLATION
% IMPLICATE, EVEN IF IT WON'T BE
% ASSIGNED INTO LAW.
% >> YEAH.
% IT'S A GREAT QUESTION.
% YOU KNOW, I THINK IT IMPLICATES,
% YOU KNOW, BROADLY POLITICAL
% DISCOURSINGS RIGHT?
% AS PROFESSOR TAI WAS MENTIONING,
% THESE ARE ISSUES THAT PEOPLE
% REALLY CARE ABOUT, AND ALL
% ACROSS THE POLITICAL SPECTRUM,
% RIGHT?%PEOPLE REALLY, REALLY
CARE ABOUT
% IT, AND AS PROFESSOR TAI POINTED
% OUT, PEOPLE VOTE ON THE BASIS OF
% THESE THING, AND SO JUST BECAUSE
% A BILL DOESN'T PASS, DOESN'T
% MEAN IT DOESN'T HAVE A POLITICAL
% IMPACT.
% IF YOU DON'T MINE, I JUST WANT
% TO -- I WILL SORT OF
% RESPECTFULLY, YOU KNOW, KIND OF
% DISAGREE SLIGHTLY WITH WHAT
% PROFESSOR TAI HAD SAID EARLIER.
% I DON'T THINK THE PROPONENTS OF
% THESE BILLS -- AND, YOU KNOW, BY
% THE WAY, NONE OF OUR BILLS, AT
% LEAST, USE THE TERM "CRITICAL
% RACE THEORY" IN THE LEGISLATION,
% ITSELF, RIGHT?
% I DON'T THINK THEY -- IT MATTERS
% TOO MUCH THAT THE THING THAT IS
% OFFICIALLY CRITICAL RACE THEORY
% IS TAUGHT IN THE SCHOOLS.
% I MEAN, I THINK WHAT THEY ARE
% CONCERNED ABOUT IS, YOU KNOW,
% THAT LIST OF THINGS, YOU KNOW,
% THAT SOMEBODY'S BEING TAUGHT
% THAT, YOU KNOW, BECAUSE OF THEIR
% RACE, THEY ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR
% THINGS IN THE PAST THAT PEOPLE
% OF THEIR RACE DID OR THINGS OF
% THAT ILK, SO, YOU KNOW, I GUESS
% I HAVE A SLIGHT, YOU KNOW,
% DISAGREEMENT THERE, AND, YOU
% KNOW, JUST ON THE QUESTION OF
% THE ATTORNEYS' FEES, IT IS
% IMPORTANT TO REALIZE, YOU ONLY
% GET ATTORNEYS' FEES IF YOU ARE
% SUCCESSFUL, RIGHT?
% YOU DON'T GET ATTORNEYS' FEES IF
% YOU LOSE THE CASE.
% NOW, IT IS TRUE THAT THERE IS
% ALWAYS THE WORRY THAT PEOPLE
% WILL BE INCENTIVIZED TO BRING
% CASES, BUT THAT'S A SYSTEM WE
% SET UP FOR LOTS OF THINGS.
% I MEAN, ENVIRONMENTAL CLAIMS WE
% HAVE ATTORNEYS' FEES FOR.
% THERE'S A LOT OF CIRCUMSTANCES
% WHERE THE LAW SAYS WE WANT TO
% ENCOURAGE PEOPLE TO HELP ENFORCE
% THE LAW BECAUSE OTHERWISE IT'S
% NOT LIKELY TO BE ENFORCED AS
% WELL.
% SO, BUT I'LL LEAVE YOU WITH
% THAT.%>> I DO WANT --
% >> PROFESSOR --
% >> OH.
% SORRY.
% >> GO AHEAD.
% I MEAN, YOU DID -- YOU DID SAY
% THAT, YOU KNOW, IN REGARDS TO
% WHAT PROFESSOR DESAI WAS SAYING
% TO THE FACT THAT EVEN JUST
% TEACHING HISTORY MIGHT SHOW
% THAT, YOU KNOW, I'M RESPONSIBLE
% FOR THE ACTIONS OF MY ANCESTORS
% IN AMERICAN HISTORY, AND YOU DID
% MENTION EARLIER THAT THAT COULD
% INCLUDE, YOU KNOW, A STUDENT
% FEELING BAD, AN THEN THAT COULD
% FALL UNDER THE PURVIEW OF THIS
% LEGISLATION, BUT DO YOU HAVE A
% REACTION TO THAT, AND WHAT DO
% YOU SAY THE IMPLICATIONS OF EVEN
% JUST INTRODUCING THIS
% LEGISLATION IS?
% >> WELL, I THINK THE IMPLICATION
% IS TO -- IF IT PASSES -- BUT
% EVEN THE INTRODUCTION OF IT HAS
% ALREADY CREATED SOME CAUSE OF
% CONCERN AMONG FACULTY MEMBERS,
% ESPECIALLY IN TERMS OF
% RECRUITMENT OF FACULTY MEMBERS
% BECAUSE THEY ARE GOING TO BE
% HERE FOR A VERY LONG TIME, AND
% EVEN IF THE BILL DOES NOT PASS
% NOW, WHO'S TO SAY AFTER A
% GUBERNATORIAL ELECTION, THE BILL
% WOULDN'T BE PASSED IN SOME
% FUTURE, SO PEOPLE ARE MAKING
% VERY LONG-TERM DECISIONS THAT
% THEY MIGHT BE MORE HESITANT TO
% MAKE IF THEY HAD AN OPTION TO GO
% TO A DIFFERENT UNIVERSITY IN A
% DIFFERENT STATE SO THERE'S THAT
% KIND OF CONCERN.
% I DO WANT TO GO BACK AND SAY
% THAT I, PERHAPS, I WAS NOT
% SUGGESTING THAT CRITICAL RACE
% THEORY IS NOT TAUGHT IN K-12 AND
% THAT'S WHY IT DOESN'T MATTER.
% MY SUGGESTION IS MOSTLY THAT
% CRITICAL RACE THEORY IS USED AS
% A SHORTHAND FOR A VERY LARGE
% NUMBER OF THINGS THAT ARE NOT
% ACTUALLY SPECIFICALLY DEFINED.
% THEREFORE, THEY ARE MORE ABLE TO
% USE THIS AS THIS SORT OF
% GENERALIZED SPECTER THAT CAN
% SORT OF SHAPE SHIFT AT WHATEVER
% MOMENTS.
% AS FOR ATTORNEYS' FEES, THE ONLY
% REASON I MENTIONED THAT IS
% BECAUSE THERE IS A PARTICULAR
% ORGANIZATION IN WISCONSIN WHO
% WITH IS ANNOUNCED THEIR MISSION
% TO CHALLENGE CRITICAL RACE
% THEORY, AND THIS IS
% SPECIFICALLY, YOU KNOW, THEY
% WOULDN'T HAVE BEEN ABLE TO GET
% ATTORNEYS' FEES BEFORE THAT, AND
% THEY NOW WOULD BE ABLE TO IF
% THIS BILL WERE TO PASS, AND SO
% THAT ORGANIZATION IS, MY
% UNDERSTANDING, THEY CONTRIBUTED%
TO THE LEGISLATION.
% SO THERE'S A CERTAIN PARTICULAR
% SELF-INTEREST INVOLVED.
% AGAIN, THERE ARE ATTORNEYS' FEES
% FOR SO MANY OTHER THINGS, BUT
% THIS SEEMS DRIVEN BY A
% PARTICULAR ORGANIZATION.
% >> VERY COMPLEX ISSUE THAT I'M
% SURE WE'LL BE COVERING, IF
% THERE'S MORE ACTION ON THIS
% LEGISLATION, BUT IN THE
% MEANTIME, PROFESSOR STEPH TAI
% AND PROFESSOR ANUJ DESAI, THANK
% YOU, BOTH, VERY, VERY MUCH FOR
% THE CONVERSATION TODAY.%>> T
HANK YOU.
% THANK YOU, PROFESSOR TAI, TOO.
% >> YEAH, THANK YOU, PROFESSOR
% DESAI.%>>> FOR MORE FROM "HER
E & NOW"
% AND PBS WISCONSIN, VISIT
% PBSWISCONSIN.ORG, AND THANK YOU%
SO MUCH FOR JOINING US ON "NOON
% WEDNESDAY."