Because I do not work in the legal field so I can't verify whether what she's claiming is true or widespread. But I can evaluate her other actions actions and statements and from there extrapolate that this is likely a fabrication or an occurrence far outside the norm that reaffirms her biases so she's amplifying it.

The most rabid anti-smokers are ex-smokers, and the strongest pacifists are army veterans.

We tend to absorb much of our values and tenets from families and environment, in a relatively uncritical way; hence, they are fundamentally weak, and often doctrinaire. When, instead, we reach certain conclusions individually, on the back of our personal experience, they become practically unassailable, because "my experiences are unquestionably real, and my brain cannot be wrong". This can be a good thing, but can also fog one's vision for good.

She was never anything but this. She only wants free speech for those who agree with her. She tried to get a professor fired for supporting Palestinian human rights while she was in college, and then has the nerve to say that individuals voluntarily refusing to associate with people who express views they find repugnant are really the ones who are doing illiberal censorship.