David has it right: a compelling governmental interest in protecting a discrete and insular minority -- one that is routinely victimized.
-----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of David Cruz Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2007 8:12 PM To: Law & Religion issues for Law Academics Subject: RE: Is First Amendment viewpoint-discriminatory against antigay speech I too found that comment a little cryptic. If Michael meant to be doctrinal rather than just attitudinally predictive, my guess would be that he didn't mean that a different First Amendment rule would apply, but that those decisions might somehow justify a conclusion that there's a compelling governmental interest present. But it wasn't at all clear to me, so perhaps Michael might clarify. David B. Cruz Professor of Law University of Southern California Gould School of Law Los Angeles, CA 90089-0071 U.S.A. -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Volokh, Eugene Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2007 4:43 PM To: Law & Religion issues for Law Academics Subject: Is First Amendment viewpoint-discriminatory against antigay speech I'm puzzled -- do Romer and Lawrence really justify not just protection of gays against governmental discrimination, but a different First Amendment rule for antigay speech than for pro-gay-rights speech or a wide range of other speech? Eugene Michael Newsom writes: > That said, I have no idea of what the Court would do with > this case, but my guess is that the Court would overturn the > jury verdict 5-4, although Kennedy, on the strength of Romer > and Lawrence, might vote with the moderates and the case > would come out the other way, 5-4 to uphold the jury verdict > (although the punitive damages might be reduced, the Court > likely to send a signal, I think, in the Valdez case that it > is prepared to rein in punitive damages). _______________________________________________ To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the messages to others. _______________________________________________ To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the messages to others. _______________________________________________ To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the messages to others.
