First we have the students at Columbia University who demanded--and got--extensions on their exams because they
Seriously, if these coddled kids are so upset about something that happened to someone that they don't know in someplace that most of them have never been and never will go, how exactly are they going to be able to deal with the real world when they get out in actual practice.
"Yo' Honor, I can't represent my client today because I'm all sad and angry about a news story that I saw on the TV, so please just reschedule today's case even though everyone else is ready for trial, ok? And if you don't, you're racist and insensitive!"
And now we have the special snowflakes at UCLA Law, who are raging mad because they were asked a final exam question about the antics of Mike Brown's step-father in ferguson.
UCLA law professor learns Ferguson-related exam question taboo
And again, because a handful of perpetually-pampered brats are upset, the adults in charge cave in. Here, the professor who asked the question on his exam decided after the fact to throw it out and not grade it, basically rewarding the whiners and totally boning anyone who actually chose to answer that question and devote some of his or her allotted test time to it. How unfair is that?
These kids--these alleged "adults" who are soon to be lawyers if they can just get past a simple bar exam--are so empotionally fragile that they can't even be asked to discuss a topic on First Amendment grounds and make an actual argument one way or the other. That's ridiculous and it should be grounds for expulsion from law school, not accomodations. I mean, with this sort of emotional stability, about the only thing that these crybabies will ever be qualified to do is flip burgers...and maybe teach at a law school.