Regent 2L in Trouble for Robertson Post

Law Students

Posted Oct 11, 2007, 10:15 am CDT
By Debra Cassens Weiss

A Regent University law student says he faces discipline for posting an online photo of school president Pat Robertson in which he is scratching his face with his middle finger.

Adam Key, who describes himself as a liberal Christian, posted the image on his Facebook page, the Virginian-Pilot reports. He says the school gave him a choice to apologize and refrain from public comment about the post, or to write a brief that defends it.

Key chose the latter option, but the school has rejected his brief, he says. “I was exercising my right to free expression,” he told the newspaper. “All I would say to Regent is, 'Please respect my right to express myself.’ ”

Key's brief cites ABA accreditation standards, saying they permit schools to enact religious policies “only to the extent that these policies are protected by the United States Constitution.” But an ABA spokeswoman told the newspaper the ABA does not address free-speech rights when considering law-school accreditation.

Key, who sports many tattoos with legal themes, has criticized Robertson in earlier Internet postings.

Comments

Report Abuse

Posted by paddy68 - 10 months, 3 weeks, 3 days, 11 hours, 37 minutes ago

What did he think when he signed up at a law school based on religious freedom for only one religion--FANATICS and ZEALOTS.
Posted by D.G. - 10 months, 3 weeks, 3 days, 10 hours, 38 minutes ago

The story is being played as if it were a First Amendment (free expression) issue but he signed away those rights when he enrolled, and the facts have no bearing on religion. However, the school looks very bad and has lost the credibility it has worked hard to garner recently. The deans should have ignored him, and probably wish they had.
Posted by M.M. - 10 months, 3 weeks, 3 days, 10 hours ago

By posting this picture, how is Key “exercising [his] right to free expression”? I don’t see the connection. On one hand, its a picture of someone scratching themselves with their middle finger so it’s not like the Dean is being defamed - unless there is a caption added. How many people scratch with their middle finger? But on the other hand, how can that posting that a picture of someone else, be considered a form of self expression? I just don’t see the argument.
Posted by AC - 10 months, 3 weeks, 3 days, 9 hours, 52 minutes ago

This is just the latest in a long line of young thugs who decide to “make a statement” by insulting other people, particularly where those people are involved in positions of leadership with religious organizations.

I have no sympathy for this law student. If this is his idea of how to “make a statement,” there is no telling what kind of misconduct awaits this young lad in his legal career where “making a statement” can land you in contempt of court, before a disciplinary board, or worse.

Is this how you treat people with respect? By selecting a screen shot of a person in a less-than-flattering position and passing it off as a photo of some premeditated gesture?

Since when should attorneys escape criticism for purposefully making someone look bad in public for absolutely no reason other than “fun” or “sport.”

This is the kind of sick behavior we need no more of in the legal profession.

Sorry. Maybe he should consider a different career or consider growing up a little.
Posted by annoyed lawyer - 10 months, 3 weeks, 3 days, 9 hours, 44 minutes ago

No no no no no! This guy is a 2L which means he has taken constitutional law. He should know that his free speech rights protect him from the government… not Regent University’s law school. Why is the first amendment so hard to comprehend?
Posted by KAL - 10 months, 3 weeks, 3 days, 9 hours, 31 minutes ago

AC: I think the point is that he does not respect Robertson.

Seriously, though, why go to Regent Law School if that’s how he feels about their policies? There are a lot of (considerably higher quality) law schools out there where one can express one’s self however one wishes.
Posted by R - 10 months, 3 weeks, 3 days, 9 hours, 23 minutes ago

The student is loving this. His Facebook profile has a picture of him with a big, red Photoshopped “CENSORED” sticker over his mouth.

He will be less pleased when future prospective employers do a Google search and find out what a potentially troublesome individual he is. What you put on the internet lasts forever…

This reminds me of the Colorado student newspaper editor who wrote a four-word “editorial” in gigantic type: “Tase This: F*** BUSH” (minus the asterisks).” Free speech? Maybe. But c’mon: GROW UP!
Posted by AC - 10 months, 3 weeks, 3 days, 9 hours, 15 minutes ago

KAL: I understand that. What I was trying to say is that lawyers need to be a little more mature and think of better ways to “make a statement” about their lack of respect for someone. I don’t think he selected the most mature way of “making a statement,” or as he put it “execercis[ing his] right to free expression.”

He also shows his lack of understanding as to what constitutes/does not constitute state action…
Posted by Aaron Eitan Meyer - 10 months, 3 weeks, 3 days, 9 hours, 15 minutes ago

"Key’s brief cites ABA accreditation standards, saying they permit schools to enact religious policies “only to the extent that these policies are protected by the United States Constitution.” But an ABA spokeswoman told the newspaper the ABA does not address free-speech rights when considering law-school accreditation.”

How exactly is the school’s action infringing upon Key’s ‘religion?’ He doesn’t come across as much of a law student…
Posted by Swiss - 10 months, 3 weeks, 3 days, 8 hours, 54 minutes ago

As a former director of student affairs, I’ve seen firsthand how ignorant law students can be in the things they post on facebook and myspace. I can appreciate someone’s right to express himself, but a law student ought to consider things a little deeper than mindless humor. Criticizing Robertson in a thoughtfully penned blog seems much more in line with the behavior one expects from a professional.

You can tell these students until you’re blue in the face that their reputation as lawyers is all they’ll really possess as a lawyer. They don’t fully understand that until they get out and practice. Now he has a reputation for disrespectful bathroom-type humor.
Posted by Jay - 10 months, 3 weeks, 3 days, 8 hours, 30 minutes ago

As Adam’s former roommate I want to assure all of you that this is not the whole story as Adam has a very long rap sheet here at Regent. Do not believe that this story tells the whole story but Adam is hiding behind the fact that the faculty and staff cannot tell the whole story because of privacy laws, if disciplined, this would simply be the straw that broke the camel’s back, if I had posted the same picture on my facebook page I would face no discipline at all I am sure, the fact that people were watching his actions is a testimony to the fact that he has caused a number of problems before this.
Posted by TW - 10 months, 3 weeks, 3 days, 8 hours, 21 minutes ago

So true. This law student hasn’t been paying attention in class. The private University has clearly NOT engaged in state action. This has nothing to do with the first amendment, no matter how many dupes in the media try to hype it that way. This student has no idea that his 15 minutes of “fame” will cost him his reputation and integrity. Whether he is within his rights or not, I would never hire someone like that (and the government can’t make me). This “controversy” only feeds the stupidity. He should be kicked out of school and kept far away from our already sullied occupation.
Posted by CF - 10 months, 3 weeks, 3 days, 7 hours, 41 minutes ago

OK, it’s true that there’s no state action, but legally the school really has no cause unless public figure Robertson wants to sue the student for defmation. Good luck there. If the school “disciplines” the student, the school looks petty and vindictive, and its shaky reputation would not weather the resulting criticism too well. Anyway, shouldn’t Roberson have a thicker skin than to concern himself with a silly photo? Assuming all other things being equal (i.e. smarts, abilities), I *would* consider this student for employment. Though his prank is childish, it shows some irreverence—a quality that in these highly oppressive and repressive times is sorely needed.
Posted by skg - 10 months, 3 weeks, 3 days, 7 hours, 29 minutes ago

Some random points:

Some law schools teach Con Law in first year, some in second year. When I took Con Law, we didn’t reach the 1st Amendmant until second semester. Although I was required to take both semesters, my law school has recently made that semester (on the 1st Amendment) an elective.

Second, if you want to make Pat Robertson look bad, just quote him. Some of the things he has said are more laughable than almost any picture of him could possibly be (I write this with the qualification that I have not seen the picture at issue).

Third, it seems obvious to me that a student’s blog or webpage reflects far more about him than the school he attends (assuming he doesn’t pretend to be speaking for the school). Hasn’t this occurred to the powers at “Liberty” (I feel compelled to use quotes because I see little liberty in conservative Christianity).
Posted by skg - 10 months, 3 weeks, 3 days, 7 hours, 26 minutes ago

To clarify the first point of my post 14 above, I took Con Law 2nd year, with the 1st Amendment portion taught in the 2nd semester of that year.
Posted by tw - 10 months, 3 weeks, 3 days, 6 hours, 54 minutes ago

Who cares what this class student took or when he took it? In my opinion, whatever intelligence or ability he had are now irrelevant. His incredibly poor judgment will keep him out of any reputable law firm. (which he will probably blame on the school). No firm with decent clients or an hourly rate worth its salt would ever tolerate any immature “irreverence” or this type or nonsense. Students should be working on the leadership skills they will need to rise in our profession, not childish pranks. This student is another example of why our profession garners very little respect from the populace.
By the way, I doubt someone with a national audience like Robertson needs to worry about photos on the internet. The real harm is that the Dean of the law school now has to devote time to this type of stupidity. If this student doesn’t like the school, its administrators or its conservative religious foundation...he should leave.
Posted by CF - 10 months, 3 weeks, 3 days, 6 hours, 30 minutes ago

Re post 16: So much hand-wringing! Silly law school pranks do not undermine the public trust in our profession; sleazy, ethics-skirting practices (at times, unfortunately, undertaken by lawyers in “reputable” law firms and by public prosecutors) do. I’ll take irreverence and creativity any day over stultifying over-caution because a person with the former qualities, based on my experience, is likely to produce a more compelling brief that will win in court. On another point, a dean who even bothers to devote his time to “this type of stupidity” (i.e. a silly prank) is himself engaging in stupidity. The only “real harm” is that a troglodyte like Robertson is “dean” of any law school. The ABA accreditors hopefully are closely scrutinizing this sham.
Posted by tw - 10 months, 3 weeks, 3 days, 5 hours, 4 minutes ago

Re post 17: Its a good point that sometimes reputable firms do have bad apples. But, Unprofessional student = unprofessional lawyer. We lack civility in the practice as it is.
(no handwringing necessary)
Moreover, troglodytes don’t have a major national tv audience for umpteen years like Robertson had.
Posted by jh - 10 months, 3 weeks, 3 days, 4 hours, 13 minutes ago

Re Post 17: Posting a picture of someone scratching their face with their middle finger does not make you creative it makes you immature.
Posted by J - 10 months, 3 weeks, 3 days, 3 hours, 22 minutes ago

Who said anything about attorneys escaping criticism for [...]? The guy isn’t even an attorney and cannot be construed as such. Why is there so much anti-lawyer sentiment in your post?

“Since when should attorneys escape criticism for purposefully making someone look bad in public for absolutely no reason other than “fun” or “sport.”

This is the kind of sick behavior we need no more of in the legal profession. “
Posted by billy bags - 10 months, 3 weeks, 2 days, 10 hours, 21 minutes ago

Any employer that is even considering hiring a Regent “law school” grad has very poor judgment anyway (see, e.g., George W. Bush & Co.). This student’s own judgment immediately came into question the day he enrolled at Regent. Why should the rest of us care about such an incredibly lame “free speech controversy” that will only affect a group of incompetents?
Posted by Kim Shaftner MD - 10 months, 3 weeks, 2 days, 3 hours, 56 minutes ago

Hmmm...I see now that the debate has degenerated to ad hominem attacks on Regent and its students. My law school professors told us that this type of criticism is usually offered by incompetents.
Posted by tw - 10 months, 2 weeks, 6 days, 5 hours, 43 minutes ago

RE: post 22- Well said.
Posted by Bertrand - 10 months, 2 weeks, 5 days, 22 hours, 35 minutes ago

How dare you insult the revered Christian mullah! How dare you exercise your right to voice some marginal dissent! You are hereby sentenced to a life long servitude of low paying legal aid jobs. No caviars and 15% tax rate for you!
Posted by Isaiah Peterson - 10 months, 2 weeks, 5 days, 22 hours, 10 minutes ago

I am a 2L at Regent who has taken classes with Mr. Key and who has seen some of his early arguments about this issue. After being instructed to remove the picture and being told that criticsm is acceptable in an academic context, Mr. Key broadcast an email message to a portion of the student body complaining of the school’s actions.

He claimed that the purpose of the picture was to make the point that Robertson is a bad man. The still frame was taken out of context. It was, Key claimed, offered as evidence that Robertson is bad because he flipped someone off. Essentially Key is upset because he was told to stop lying.

The email message Key sent to other students sparked a flurry of replies pointing out the inconsistencies and flaws in his arguments. (As an asside, the message presented his argument publicly then told everyone who wished to respond to do so privately. This would have caused only his position to be aired publicly. He essentially requested others to censor themselves while complaining of being censored.) A debate about the subject occurred. Key faired poorly due to the inconsistency and lack of reason in his arguments.

Key’s email message made clear that the school did not object to criticism of Robertson. Had Key chosen to voice that criticism in an academic context (as opposed to doing it with a picture stripped of context, and which required a subsequent explanation before his alleged point could be assessed) there would have been no problem. Others here have noted that the posting of the picture makes Key less hirable. It is an immature, pointless and ineffective way to make a point. Key isn’t the only one who suffers from such an image. Other students from his school to some degree have their qualification and professionalism cast in a negative light due to his actions. A well reasoned and articulated debate about the flaws of Robertson has the opposite effect. The school requested that Key make his point in a professional and academic manner. This is a reasonable request.

Key’s attempt to escalate this into something else demonstrates that he is far more interested in attention than discussion.
Posted by Isaiah Peterson - 10 months, 2 weeks, 5 days, 22 hours, 1 minute ago

I am sorry to take up so much space, but there is one more thing I want to add.

As noted above Mr. Key requested that students respond to his public message privately which would have had the effect of having only his message being presented. That is essentially what is happening currently with the coverage. The school is not allowed to offer its version of the events because of privacy rules. Though Key failed in his attempt to avoid criticism and public debate through the email postings, he has succeeded with the national press coverage.

There is either irony or hypocracy at work when one complains of censorship and lack of freedom of speech while avoiding public debate by speaking out publicly while encouraging opposition to no respond in kind or taking comfort in the fact that the opposition isn’t allowed to do so.

I don’t think Key really is all that concerned about free speech.
Posted by kks - 10 months, 2 weeks, 5 days, 5 hours, 22 minutes ago

Looking at Mr. Key’s Facebook page, one sees his self-description as a “Biblical Christian” an inch away from an image doctored into an obscene gesture. Which Bible, exactly, is he reading? And if it is Protestant Bible that Lutherans generally use, how do his actions honor the cause of Christ? Yikes.
Posted by Law Man - 10 months, 2 weeks, 5 days, 2 hours, 37 minutes ago

"It’s a beautiful day in the neighborhood...well, look here boys and girls! Who do we have with us today? Why, it is Adam Key! Can you say, ‘hypo-crite?’ I knew you could.”
Posted by tw - 10 months, 2 weeks, 3 days, 8 hours, 49 minutes ago

Its interesting that the posts from actual Regent students (ie: 11 and 25) are pretty well reasoned, articulate and respectfull. So much for the ad hominem attacks.
Posted by cheryl from lewes - 10 months, 2 weeks, 3 days, 7 hours, 6 minutes ago

Pat Robertson is a con artist. WHAT BIBLE DOES HE READ? As a Christian, I am disgusted by him and his adulterer gushy son Gordon. They gratify their OWN desires and do not express love. Their faith is fake. Their healings are fake and are for the purpose of bringing in money. They exploit the most trusting and faithful souls. They will smear anyone who does not bow down to them or who threatens to expose their wrongdoing. They tell others to confess their sins yet they do not confess their own sins. Pat Robertson is gross in his self-aggrandizing and hatemongering. God would not speak to such a mean and prideful person. It does not fit. He is NOT a prophet or a healer. His “fruit” is discord, hatred, dissensions, gossip, meddling, spite, deceit, greed, selfish ambition, and immorality. I hope the young law student will move on with his life and find another law school where he will fit in. I have seen much worse caricatures of Pat Robertson on the web. The young student is not guilty of any crime. I do not wish to insult anyone who is a student there, but I must speak the truth about what I know is in this hypocrites’s heart. Pat Robertson is the founder of that school but he IS NOT a distinguished and respectable leader, not at all. He is a coward, a liar, and a bully. As a televangelist, he has a license to lie and to cheat and to steal and he is accountable to no one. Pat Robertson is completely immoral and so is his son. Do not send them your money. Do not look to them for healing. Please read your Bible and use common sense. The red flags are there. These people are scam artists. I think God smite Pat Robertson with those donkey ears.
Posted by psychiatrist - 10 months, 2 weeks, 3 days, 6 hours, 56 minutes ago

Those leaders should be embarassed by what Pat Robertson does to himself with regular ridiculous displays of bigotry and hate. He looks and behaves like he’s mentally unstable most of the time. He acts like a child. They must be blind. The show is all about him. It is embarassing and immoral to use God like that.
This picture shouldn’t have upset them. I don’t get it. Do you ever watch Comedy Central? They have a field day with that moron! PAT ROBERTSON IS A JOKE AND THAT SCHOOL IS A JOKE. AND one more thing, WHO would commit adultery with Gordon Robertson?????
Posted by Regent 2L - 10 months, 2 weeks, 2 days, 6 hours, 50 minutes ago

Interesting to observe how far afield the comments have traveled from the primary issue.
Posted by big yawn - 10 months, 2 weeks, 23 minutes ago

Well, it looks as if this has fizzled and Key has had his fifteen minutes of Warhol fame. Hope he wasn’t counting on finishing law school, or actually getting a job in the legal profession. What a loser!
Posted by cheryl from lewes - 10 months, 1 week, 6 days, 14 hours, 43 minutes ago

Whether it has all fizzled out or not, good came out of it. Because of Adam Key, a forum was provided in which the truth about Pat Robertson could be told without fear of being smeared. He is a kook but he is much worse than just a kook. He and all the others on that tv show helped Gordon cheat on his wife with a stalker whore. They are fake holypeople.

Thank you, Adam Key, for making this opportunity available.
Posted by xoxoxo - 10 months, 1 week, 6 days, 11 hours, 13 minutes ago

check out abovethelaw.com
Posted by xoxoxo - 10 months, 1 week, 6 days, 10 hours, 8 minutes ago

google regentgate
Posted by paster - 10 months, 1 week, 6 days, 5 hours, 27 minutes ago

I wonder why the Good Christians there in Pat Robertson’s World did’nt get rid of Gordon Robertson after he was caught in an adulterous affair. He continues to sit there on tv feigning healings and words of knowledge and holiness. Those people are accountable to NO ONE. They care nothing about the Constitution OR the Commandments. They smear anyone who does not bow down to them.
Posted by tbytenn - 10 months, 1 week, 6 days, 4 hours, 9 minutes ago

If they wish their leader to be treated with respect and dignity, perhaps they will ask their leader to behave himself in a respectful manner and with dignity.
Posted by disgusted - 10 months, 1 week, 5 days, 4 hours, 4 minutes ago

-the right to file suit is for everyone
-not just to him and his ass kissers
-that nut cant refrain from meddling stirring up anger calling names and neither can his followers
-they attack their accusers in the same vicious manner
-allow due process
-act like adults instead of like pat robertson

Commenting has expired on this post.

ABA Journal - Law News Now

Law Students