TyinLex
- Kentucky
The University will always have its own interest top of mind in any decision they make, whether it's a potential first-round NBA pick, or an employee posting about free food on campus.
TSJ Thread
- Status
I understand the complexity. But we are also dealing with a student athletes future .
As for another school, I don’t think I would have a an opinion on that.
lstewart53x3
- Scottsdale, Arizona
Geeze, “The University first resisted and informed Mr. Campolargo that he was not allowed to be represented by a lawyer in their disciplinary proceedings.”
So no suspension ever for a student-athlete charged with criminal misconduct unless/until they’ve been convicted?
Following policy…Athletic Department doesn’t have any other recourse unless a higher authority orders them
Yes, with the same supposed fact situation I would think it was unfair, even if that athlete was from a different school.....unless that school was playing against The Beloved in the near future.
You have to be a certain age to understand this, but yes there is waxy yellow buildup here.
Strawman.
But I'd strongly favor, absent additional information, that no suspension is valid unless they've gone through a full and fair due process evaluation, in compliance with legal and constitutional rights. See UUIC OSCR policy.
And that's a huge issue. There's definitely training that needs to be done on issues like this and I'm sure they have some. But it's something that should be beat into the guys. At the same time you can't just let someone go based on an accusation. You'll lose money.
To TSJ and Illini basketball fans, it might feel that way.
But where does the fairness line end for TSJ and begin for the faculty, students, and parents who are watching to see how the university treats one particular student athlete is both famous and a huge revenue maker for the DIA, who has now been accused of a violent crime.
Due process has always been designed to keep the government from depriving people accused of crimes of rights, property, etc. But the line there has always been fuzzy, because at some point you have to consider the rights of others affected by the alleged criminal actions of the accused. Not to mention how much UIUC counts as "government". In this context, they receive federal funds as a public university. But when I receive a stimulus package from Uncle Sam, that doesn't suddenly make me a government employee, does it? So again, it's fuzzy. Due process works to his advantage here more than his detriment. It is due process that might very well be protecting TSJ from being outright kicked out of the university, imprisoned before trial with no recourse, loss of any of his property (other than bail posted). Most importanly, due process arguments don't change based on the strength of a case.
He is generally able to live life up until the line where other parties may feel deprived of their rights. It is a balancing act, one particularly affecting TSJ's future career (and our fandom, driving many of these "fairness" arguments which would never be brought up if the man had simply been accused of burglarly or DUI). This is where his arguments in the TRO come from. I think his argument is good, for the record, and makes a good case of him being somewhat of an exception relative to other students, even other student athletes. I honestly can't tell you what the judge will do here other than I think if he does allow the TRO, he will set extreme conditions designed to protect the safety of other students on campus, such as a curfew or distancing himself from any establishments that serve alcohol up until the TRO is lifted. It will be extremely narrow in scope however it goes. I think this would be a good way to offer relief. But I dunno if the judge will buy it. For example, there's nothing saying TSJ can't be acquitted by the fall and play in Europe for a year prepping for the 2025 draft. It simply delays his payday while also allowing a chance for justice to take hold. Not to mention that a normal student who gets suspended from the university under this policy would potentially not graduate because they miss classes, fall behind, etc. Would they not also be affected unfairly by this? Yet it's hard to believe the public would bat an eye about an accused rapist, burglar, etc. whose only repercussion is they miss lectures in ECON 101.
I'm actually a little bit surprised that there has never been a jurisdiction argument filed here. Does the university have the right to suspend students who commit offenses beyond the scope of their purview? It would at least be something the lawyer could try.
But I assume you can suspend the person until that due process occurs because otherwise they could be a danger to other students.
Technically, that's the way the legal system works. Although, you could have your own investigation and find things on your own. If something bad likes this has happened. It usually is something that is a behavioral.
I am so tired of the all or nothing people. You can create policies that are better suited for situations like this. The current policies are reactionary to behaviors and policies that ignored bad behavior and in some circumstances covered up. Policies like that are wrong as well. You can't tell me there is not a better way.
There may be, but don't assume it is at all easy to come up with such policy without it ever being tested in a courtroom.
Any news today from our beloved insiders?
Is it Friday yet?
The way our legal system works is that a defendant cannot be imprisoned until a conviction occurs. They can face countless other negative consequences based merely on a charge, such as job loss, and there’s no constitutional protection for that.
lstewart53x3
- Scottsdale, Arizona
Sounds like it’s in the judges hands now.
We will see. The preliminary hearing will very likely happen in a couple of weeks, whether or not the TRO is granted. People in the know seem to think the TRO is a coin flip-could go either way. I think he has a pretty good argument but we will see
I missed the part where the school is putting TSJ to death, locking him up, or repossessing his home. Those are the things against which the due process clause of the Constitution protects.
lstewart53x3
- Scottsdale, Arizona
Overall, I can see both sides of the argument. But if TJ is unable to play basketball until this case is over, that’s the equivalent of taking his home. That’ll cost him millions, if not 10s of millions.
This is Illinois. If it's a coin flip we already know it's flicking us directly in the nuts.
Due process, as a protection provided by the Constitution, goes beyond the three examples you cited. More generally, due process as part of the 14th amendment prohibits the state from depriving any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.
During my Constitutional Law class with Professor Novak at U of I in the mid nineties, we even talked about due process rights in connection with the infliction of corporal punishment by a public school official, relative to a school child's constitutional rights.
- Status