The point, which should have been obvious, is that on the facts presented, the ACLU attorney got the first amendment right. The Michigan ACLU was not counsel for the Ann Arbor Public Schools or its employees and did not represent them in any aspect of this dispute. The Pioneers' beef is with the school district, not the ACLU.
Michael R. Masinter 3305 College Avenue Nova Southeastern University Fort Lauderdale, Fl. 33314 Shepard Broad Law Center (954) 262-6151 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Chair, ACLU of Florida Legal Panel On Wed, 21 Apr 2004, Kim Daniels wrote: > Rather than provide my second-hand view of events, I went ahead and > forwarded Mr. Masinter's e-mail to Rob Muise, the Thomas More Law Center > attorney who represents the plaintiff in the Hansen case. Here's his > response: > > "So what's the point? That the ACLU didn't know the facts of the case, so > the advice it gave in support of the school's position was a mistake? > The ACLU attorney not only spoke with a GSA advisor, he also spoke with > the school's equity officer (we successfully sued the equity officer as > well). The equity officer testified during her deposition that she did > speak with an ACLU attorney, "giving him the factual, talking over with him > the factual scenario of what had happened with the panel and Pioneers for > Christ wanting to be represented and listening to what he thought with > regard to that particular fact scenario." > > Is the ACLU now saying that the school was wrong? They certainly have been > very quiet about it if that is the case. The reality is that the ACLU was > fully aware of the facts of this case, and they advised the GSA and a school > official that excluding my client and holding a diversity week panel on > homosexuality and religion, such as the school did, was constitutional." > > > Kim Daniels > Associate Counsel > Thomas More Law Center > 3475 Plymouth Rd. > Suite 100 > Ann Arbor, MI 48105-2550 > (734) 827-2001 (main office) > (301) 907-3925 (direct dial) > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > From: Michael MASINTER <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Reply-To: Law & Religion issues for Law Academics <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Date: Wed, 21 Apr 2004 14:22:22 -0400 (EDT) > > To: Law & Religion issues for Law Academics <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Subject: Re: HAnsen v. Ann Arbor Public Schools 293 FSupp2d 780 > > > > Because neither the court nor Mr. Muise participated in the conversation > > between a GSA advisor and the ACLU, neither is in any position to describe > > that conversation. I spoke this morning with the legal director of the > > Michigan ACLU to find out what role, if any, it played in Hansen. Here is > > what really happened. > > > > A GSA advisor did call the Michigan ACLU; he asked whether a student > > organization sponsoring its own event was free to select speakers based on > > their viewpoint, and more specifically, if a student organization > > presenting its own program on diversity was obliged to include speakers > > opposed to including gay, lesbian and bisexual students within the ambit > > of antidiscrimination policies. The ACLU response was that a student > > organization was free to select speakers who advanced rather than rejected > > its message, and noted that the school was forbidden from barring other > > student organizations with different viewpoints from being heard at their > > own functions. > > > > > > Michael R. Masinter 3305 College Avenue > > Nova Southeastern University Fort Lauderdale, Fl. 33314 > > Shepard Broad Law Center (954) 262-6151 > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] Chair, ACLU of Florida Legal Panel > > > > On Tue, 20 Apr 2004, Kim Daniels wrote: > > > >> My colleague Rob Muise represents the student who challenged the school > >> district's action. While the ACLU was not directly involved, apparently the > >> GSA advisors called the Michigan ACLU asking for its support of their > >> exclusion of an opposing religious perspective from the panel. The > >> organization told the GSA advisors and some school officials that they could > >> exclude the Catholic view during Diversity Week's "homosexuality and > >> religion" panel. In particular, it apparently supported the school's > >> contention that inviting a one-sided group of clergy to give a presentation > >> to students about homosexuality and religion during instructional time did > >> not violate the Establishment Clause. > >> > >> FYI, it's not clear yet whether the school district will appeal. > >> > >> > >> Kim Daniels > >> Associate Counsel > >> Thomas More Law Center > >> 3475 Plymouth Rd. > >> Suite 100 > >> Ann Arbor, MI 48105-2550 > >> (734) 827-2001 (main office) > >> (301) 907-3925 (direct dial) > >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> > >> > >> > >>> From: Michael MASINTER <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >>> Reply-To: Law & Religion issues for Law Academics > >>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >>> Date: Mon, 19 Apr 2004 17:19:40 -0400 (EDT) > >>> To: Law & Religion issues for Law Academics <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >>> Subject: Re: HAnsen v. Ann Arbor Public Schools 293 FSupp2d 780 > >>> > >>> I would not assume on the basis of the single reference to a deposition > >>> that the ACLU saw nothing wrong with excluding some religious points of > >>> view; who knows 1) who the deponent talked to; 2) what he told that > >>> person, and 3) what that person said. > >>> > >>> The ACLU did not represent either party in Hurley; it lists Hurley as one > >>> of its 100 greatest hits: > >>> http://www.aclu.org/TakeAction/TakeAction.cfm?ID=11927&c=242 > >>> > >>> Michael R. Masinter 3305 College Avenue > >>> Nova Southeastern University Fort Lauderdale, Fl. 33314 > >>> Shepard Broad Law Center (954) 262-6151 > >>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] Chair, ACLU of Florida Legal Panel > >>> > >>> On Mon, 19 Apr 2004, AJCONGRESS wrote: > >>> > >>>> The Establishment Clause violation in cases seems so blatant-and the ACLU > >>>> usually so vigilant about such violations-that it is noteworthy that it > >>>> reportedly saw nothing wrong with excluding other religious points of view > >>>> from the panel.This is especially so since in the Boston parade cases,if > >>>> memory serves,the ACLU did not support the right of parade organizers to > >>>> exclude marchers expressing a gay rights point of view. > >>>> I agree with your criticism of the language of the opinion. > >>>> ----- Original Message ----- > >>>> From: "Michael MASINTER" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >>>> To: "Law & Religion issues for Law Academics" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >>>> Sent: Monday, April 19, 2004 4:43 PM > >>>> Subject: Re: HAnsen v. Ann Arbor Public Schools 293 FSupp2d 780 > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>> I wonder about the reference below to the ACLU. The ACLU did not > >>>>> represent any of the parties to this litigation; the sole reference to the > >>>>> ACLU is reported deposition testimony of one defendant in which he is said > >>>>> to have claimed that he had contacted the ACLU to determine whether the > >>>>> first amendment required a particular course of action. 293 F. Supp. 2d > >>>>> at 790 n.13. > >>>>> > >>>>> I also wonder about the care that goes into judicial writing (and perhaps > >>>>> reasoning) that describes panelists with religious beliefs that do not > >>>>> condemn homosexuality as: > >>>>> > >>>>> "six pro-homosexual adult clergy and religious leaders" > >>>>> > >>>>> 293 F. Supp. 2d at 791. > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> Michael R. Masinter 3305 College Avenue > >>>>> Nova Southeastern University Fort Lauderdale, Fl. 33314 > >>>>> Shepard Broad Law Center (954) 262-6151 > >>>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] Chair, ACLU of Florida Legal Panel > >>>>> > >>>>> On Mon, 19 Apr 2004, AJCONGRESS wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>>> I just stumbled across the above captioned case.The Ann Arbor School > >>>>>> District sponsored a diversity week.It delegated to the Gay Straight > >>>>>> Alliance(GSA) club the responsiblity of conducting a panel on sexual > >>>>>> orientation as part of the offical school program.GSA decided on a > >>>> panel in > >>>>>> which 6 ministers explained why homosexuality was not forbidden by the > >>>>>> Bible.The GSA refused a Catholic student's request to allow a minister > >>>> with > >>>>>> an opposing point of view to participate on this panel It decison ot > >>>>>> exclcude different points of view was upheld by school > >>>>>> authorities.Apparently the ACLU also supported the club's refusal.) > >>>>>> The trial court found both view point discrimination and an > >>>> establishment of > >>>>>> religion in this arraingement. > >>>>>> I do not know if an appeal has been taken. > >>>>>> Marc Stern > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> _______________________________________________ > >>>>>> To post, send message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>>>>> To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see > >>>> http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw > >>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> _______________________________________________ > >>>>> To post, send message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>>>> To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see > >>>> http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> _______________________________________________ > >>>> To post, send message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>>> To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see > >>>> http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw > >>>> > >>> > >>> > >>> _______________________________________________ > >>> To post, send message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>> To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see > >>> http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw > >>> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> To post, send message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see > >> http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw > >> > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > To post, send message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see > > http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw > > > > _______________________________________________ > To post, send message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see > http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw > _______________________________________________ To post, send message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw
