IIRC, that was the Jewish student's court application for an injunction. Not sure what is happening with McGill now.
University was named as an interested party and the administration was pretty clearly on the side of the injunction.
For now things are in a holding pattern.
LeGault wants them thrown out, the Montreal cops have pointed out things are peaceful and no they aren't going in yet.
It's pretty basic that a property owner can order non owners off his / her / its land. Simply trespass law. So there's no legal barrier to Columbia or UCLA using the cops to clear the encampments.
Sure.
But there is also a long-standing tradition of free speech protest on university grounds.
Going right in with "sic the cops on anyone speaking up" is bad.
It's simply a case of at what point individual campuses decide that the presence of the encampment is no longer tolerable. If the campers are simply going to sit quietly in a group for a couple of days and then leave, then no need to clear them.
Yes.
And there is a huge difference between "we've negotiated in good faith for a while, things aren't going anywhere, we are bringing in the cops" and "WTF these kids suck, crack their skulls on day 1".
The fact is that different universities have reacted differently and gotten different results.
Sometimes, anticipating those different results is part of the protest tactic.
If the encampments become never-ending sources of harassment, violence and disruption, then the universities can use proportionate force to clear them. We all have our line in the sand and we're going to choose different points to draw it. I am entirely unsympathetic to the Palestinian cause and no doubt that influences me.
And "proportionate force" is also one of the axes of discussion.
A couple of universities in California have had cops clear the encampments entirely with no violence and no arrests.
Others have degenerated into brawls.