Shortly after the October 7 Hamas terror attacks in Israel, New York University Law School Student Bar Association president Ryna Workman drew some unwanted national attention for a newsletter she published. In it, she expressed her “unwavering and absolute solidarity with Palestinians in their resistance against oppression.” She went on to generally blame Israel for the violence and stand in solidarity with Hamas. The backlash from alumni and donors came quickly, with many pro-Hamas students being publicly identified as “undesirable” future hires. All of the pushback seems to have had an effect on the student body. Yesterday, an online vote by the student body was held and Workman was removed from her post. The vote followed the delivery of a petition of “no confidence.” (National Review)

The New York University School of Law student body has voted to remove Ryna Workman from her post as president of the university’s Student Bar Association (SBA), according to an email sent to the student body Monday and obtained by National Review.

The online vote, which was triggered by a “no confidence” petition signed by 25 percent of the student body, closed Wednesday after being held open for a week. Of the 1,176 students who voted, 707 said Workman should not remain in office, while 428 voted to retain Workman and 41 abstained.

Workman first made headlines with an October 10 message in an NYU Law newsletter blaming Israel for Hamas’s October 7 massacres.

Workman didn’t stop at simply publishing a newsletter backing the terrorists. She went on ABC News to give an interview doubling down on her message. Later that same day she was caught on video tearing down and defacing posters of kidnapped Israeli hostages. She’s a real gem, isn’t she?

Remember Ryna Workman? The NYU law student who penned a letter of support for Hamas and had her top tier job offer rescinded because of it?

Now she’s on camera defacing posters of kidnapped Israelis! pic.twitter.com/Z4ksseWNUe

— StopAntisemitism (@StopAntisemites) October 25, 2023

New York University actually accounted for itself fairly well in all of this, as did much of the student body (eventually). Workman has largely stood alone in her pro-Hamas rhetoric. Shortly after her hateful newsletter drew national attention, the school’s Student Bar Association issued its own statement, saying that they “did not write, approve, or see” the newsletter prior to publication and did not endorse it. The entire board then resigned, leading to the need for a vote by the entire body to facilitate her removal.

That was far from the end of Workman’s self-generated problems. Winston & Strawn LLP, a law firm in Chicago, had previously extended an offer of employment to her following graduation. That offer was quickly rescinded, leaving the former SBA president to seek a job elsewhere. The firm told reporters that her views are “profoundly in conflict with Winston & Strawn’s values.” That’s probably going to wind up being a large albatross around her neck when she goes looking for another position with any reputable law firm.

If nothing else, this may be a hopeful sign for the future of this country. Ryna Workman is, of course, free to express her views as she wishes. But as a public figure of any sort, she must also be aware that people may hold her to account for those views if they reflect a fundamentally evil philosophy such as supporting terrorism, murder, rape, and kidnapping. That’s probably not the sort of person that Winston & Strawn’s clients want representing them when they walk into a courtroom.

The only way to show some of these young, pro-Hamas protesters the error of their ways is to invoke a real-world, economic cost for their decisions. Workman isn’t the only one facing this sort of backlash. The students at Harvard who spoke out loudly in support of the terrorist group have seen their names and faces displayed on a panel truck that has been circling the campus and the vicinity of major law firms and business centers. People have been taking notice and many of the students are probably realizing that their future career options are dwindling by the day.

Does that sound overly harsh or unkind? It shouldn’t. The left has been merrily engaged in cancel culture for years. They have no problem trying to ruin the careers of people based on their political speech, typically for things far less sinister than supporting literal terrorism. I imagine that shoe seems far less comfortable now that it’s on the other foot. Perhaps these people will learn a collective lesson from all of this, though I seriously doubt it.