When the episode started out, and they revealed that Jordan being 17 made it legal, I figured this would be an episode where Bull flips the script and changed to defending the teacher. So disappointing that they still ended up on the side attacking the ones who did nothing morally wrong, really. So then I'm hoping they lose this one, but the show is called "Bull", because he wins, so I doubt this will go the right way (I'm still watching, but reviews sound like I'm right, this will come out wrong).
The laws and rules referenced in this episode are about preventing authority figures from using their power to manipulate to people beneath them. Jordan was in no way forced or manipulated. He was a willing participant. He consented. In situations like this, the usual response is that a minor cannot legally consent (except that they establish he's not legally a minor), but consenting, being a willing participant, should still be a VERY important factor! How about honouring the SPIRIT of the law and stop focusing on the LETTER of the law? A birthday isn't a magical event, he's depicted as 17 and 3 months old, is he supposed to suddenly become instantly capable in 9 months? Nothing to worry about anymore, but requiring COURT INTERVENTION now? As it is, the school rules against fraternization means she was fired, seems a bit heavy-handed and overly interfering, but I guess there needs to be SOMETHING to prevent possible favouritism (better grades than he earned, advanced notice of tests, etc), but such heavy-handedness should be more than sufficient, these court proceedings are ridiculous.
So disappointing to see TAC on the wrong, prudish, side of this fight. Larger age gaps later in life are perfectly normal and acceptable. 7 years? In 3 years nobody would blink twice (at 20 and 27). 10 is quite common. They're just a year early, really.
