Welcome to RantCrush Top 5, where we take you through today’s top five controversial stories in the world of law and policy. Who’s ranting and raving right now? Check it out below:

The Police Shooting of 13-Year-Old Tyree King

After reports of an armed robbery, a Columbus, Ohio police offer shot and killed 13-year-old Tyree King after police saw him “retrieve a gun from his waistband.” After the shooting, investigators discovered the gun was actually a BB gun with an attached laser sight.

When police were called to the scene, King and two other individuals were demanding money in a crowd of people. Police attempted to speak to them but King and another suspect ran away into an alley where the fatal shooting occurred.

This is incredibly sad. Still, opinions on the matter have certainly been very mixed:

If I pulled any type of gun on a police officer, I would expect to be shot at. Color doesn’t matter when it comes to safety.#TyreeKing

— Daniel Dovel (@danieldovel) September 15, 2016

People have wasted no time blaming #TyreeKing for his own death. He had a BB gun. He was 13. He didn’t have to die. #BlackLivesMatter

— Sam White (@samwhiteout) September 15, 2016

Rant Crush

RantCrush collects the top trending topics in the law and policy world each day just for you.

The post RantCrush Top 5: September 15, 2016 appeared first on Law Street.

By now we have all heard about the heart-wrenching news that three young people have been killed in Chapel Hill, North Carolina. The three were Deah Shaddy Barakat, 23; Yusor Mohammad, 21; and Razan Mohammad Abu-Salha, 19. Barakat was a student at the University of North Carolina School of Dentistry, and his wife, Yusor Mohammad was to begin her studies there this year. Her younger sister, Razan Mohammad Abu-Salha, was a student at North Carolina State University in nearby Raleigh. They were shot by a man named Craig Stephen Hicks, 46, who is now in police custody.

Victims’ dad says he believes students’ deaths in #ChapelHillshooting are hate crimes. http://t.co/EdxTgmcPEM#wralpic.twitter.com/sRCQxU5lGR

— WRAL NEWS in NC (@WRAL) February 11, 2015

Here’s a picture of Barakat and Mohammad at their recent wedding:

God willing they will spend eternity together #ChapelHillShootingpic.twitter.com/k08A1LHxgm

— rabia chaudry (@rabiasquared) February 11, 2015

The motive of the attack isn’t known yet–police are saying that it might have been over some parking spots. Others, including the family members of the slain, are concerned it was a hate crime. Some are saying that it was terrorism.

I don’t know exactly what happened, and it would be disingenuous to pretend otherwise. That being said, I’m not surprised by this news. Horrified, sure. Disgusted, absolutely. Incredibly saddened, of course. Surprised? Not at all.

This is what happens when we take an entire group of people and stereotype, demean, and dehumanize them for years and years. When we make them the bogeymen for our problems. When we associate them with people who do horrible things just because they happen to share a religion. We use violent rhetoric, and then we’re supposed to be surprised when there’s a violent result.

What violent rhetoric am I talking about? Here are some examples, but they’re only examples–this is by no means anywhere near a full list.

From Fox New’s “Outnumbered:”

The quote that stuck out to me was Andrea Tantaros saying:

If you study the history of Islam. Our ship captains were getting murdered. The French had to tip us off. I mean these were the days of Thomas Jefferson. They’ve been doing the same thing. This isn’t a surprise. You can’t solve it with a dialogue. You can’t solve it with a summit. You solve it with a bullet to the head. Its the only thing these people understand. And all we’ve heard from this president is a case to heap praise on this religion, as if to appease them.

You read that right: “You solve it with a bullet to the head.” Furthermore look at the language she uses…”these people”….”this religion.” This is a piece on ISIS, yes, but it’s one that’s not careful about making any sort of distinctions. “This religion” refers to Islam as a whole, make no mistake.

Or how about the time that Joe Walsh, a man who was actually elected to the United States Congress said that “One thing I’m sure of is that there are people in this country – there is a radical strain of Islam in this country -– it’s not just over there –- trying to kill Americans every week.” Again, there’s a clear message here–Muslims are trying to kill people. There’s no distinction here–Walsh is basically saying that every single one of the roughly three million Muslims in the United States are out to get anyone who adheres to a different religion.

Or what about the time Sean Hannity compared the Qur’an to Mein Kampf?

Muslim extremists exist, of course, but to use violent rhetoric in reference to all Muslims is as inaccurate as it is reprehensible. But that’s exactly why I’m not surprised–if you are constantly inundated by media and leaders who treat a segment of the population as less than, it’s easy to internalize that misinformation as fact.

I’m not necessarily saying that Hicks committed a hate crime–his family keeps repeating that it was over a parking dispute. But it seems incredibly likely–after all the definition of a hate crime is pretty broad. As CNN’s legal analyst Sunny Hostin points out: “To qualify as a hate crime, all that matters is that the crime was motivated, in whole or in part, by the offender’s bias.” Evidence has come out that Hicks was a militant atheist, and that he often decried religion. Again, I don’t know what happened here. But calling it a hate crime, in today’s environment of vitriol, doesn’t seem like it’s too much of a stretch. When there’s so much hate, it’s very hard to imagine that said hate plays no part.

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Chapel Hill Shooting: An Environment of Hate appeared first on Law Street.

Lately, we’ve been hearing more and more about the mishandling of sexual assaults on college campuses. Although these allegations span years, sexual assault on college campuses is by no means a new conversation. The recent wave of outrage and advocacy began with a courageous young woman named Angie Epifano. Angie was a student at Amherst College in Massachusetts when she was raped by an acquaintance. She received little to no help from the University, and eventually published a first hand account in The Amherst Student, the student newspaper on campus. Her entire, heart-wrenching story is here (trigger warning), but the gist is that the school that she trusted institutionalized, discounted, and questioned her every move instead of providing her with appropriate and much needed resources.

The University of Connecticut, located in the sleepy northeastern countryside, has also come under fire for how they have handled sexual assault cases. Victims claim that UConn didn’t help them, and that they were discouraged from reporting the rapes to the police. One young woman, Rosemary Richie, who was raped by a football player, claims officials at UConn did not believe her.

There are stories after stories after stories on almost every single college campus in the country. Take Amanda Tripp, at the University of Indianapolis. She filed a report that she was raped on November 26, 2012. When she saw a copy almost 2 months later, the police had written, “a crime did not occur” on it. No one ever followed up with her. Or how about Landen Gambill? She reported being sexually assaulted by an ex-boyfriend. The UNC honor court subsequently found him not guilty. She was then charged herself, accused of creating an “intimidating and hostile” environment for the man who had assaulted her by charging him with such assault. Regardless of whether or not he was actually guilty, a young woman should never be scared that she might get in trouble with the school if she reports a crime.

The numbers speak for themselves: at least 1 in 4 women in college will be the victim of a sexual assault during their time in school. Colleges need to be able to provide resources for that 25% of their female population that is attacked. But as we’ve seen time after time after time, this often is not the case.

Now, these women are fighting back. The Title IX Network —an informal network of activists–has helped women at multiple schools file federal claims against the universities. The Title IX Network bills itself as “working to support all survivors, to change how colleges and universities handle sexual assault, and to change a culture where violence is normalized.” Most recently these include Amherst, UConn, and Vanderbilt University; earlier this year claims were filed against UNC, Occidental, Swarthmore, UC Boulder, Dartmouth, USC, Berkeley, and Emerson.

The complaints have been filed under both Title IX and Clery Act provisions. Title IX states that universities have a responsibility to take immediate and effective steps when allegations of sexual violence are brought forth. Under Title IX, the Department of Education can impose fines or block access to federal funds. The Clery Act requires schools to accurately disclose crimes that occur on campus. By not handling and reporting these allegations of sexual assault properly, the universities against whom complaints have been levied may be in violation.

Something has to change. Twenty-five percent of young women, twenty-five percent of my peers, should not be assaulted in the environments in which they are supposed to learn and grow. If these charges lead to any sort of change in the abhorrent way universities have been handling this issue, I say more power to the Title IX network.

—

Anneliese Mahoney (@AMahoney8672) is Lead Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

Featured image courtesy of [Wolfram Burner via Flickr]

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Title IX Complaints Against Universities Grow appeared first on Law Street.