As regular readers of this blog know, I have had nothing but good things to say about Duke students, who—to a far greater extent than the faculty who teach them—quickly recognized the issues at play in this case. But I couldn’t bypass an astonishing column by senior James Zou published in today’s Chronicle. Writing, he asserted, as a believer in “due political and judicial process,” he urged Duke students registered to vote in
On March 31, Mike Nifong set up a system treating Duke students according to different procedures than those applied to every other resident of
Many people—perhaps, even, Zou, who tepidly concedes that Nifong isn’t “the ideal district attorney to serve the
Such rhetoric, no doubt, warms the hearts of the Group of 88. And, I suppose, such rhetoric is also an outgrowth of an institution whose leadership to date has looked the other way at the suppression of the DSED registration drive outside the Duke stadium during the Duke-UVA football game.
For those, however, who believe in “due political and judicial process,” Zou’s column ranks with the remarks of NCCU student Chan Hall (who wanted to see the Duke students prosecuted “whether it happened or not,” since “it would be justice for things that happened in the past”) as the most contemptible statement by a college student in this affair. Zou’s proposal deserves the strongest possible condemnation.