(of course, I think he should have appealed, but that is another story) On Thu, Jul 14, 2016 at 9:45 AM, Michael Worley <mwor...@byulaw.net> wrote:
> Thank you. This is what I thought you meant, and it is internally > consistent with what I know of your view on such issues. > > My personal position is that he could have conveyed the same message in a > way that served good purposes-- calming religious tensions-- without using > the reasoning as part of his core decisions. > > On Thu, Jul 14, 2016 at 9:39 AM, Marty Lederman <lederman.ma...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> Michael: Thank you for asking. Of course I have no objection to protecting >> the least among us, let alone to the Golden Rule. Those are wonderful >> aspirations and guides to behavior, and they might even appropriately be >> considered in government decision-making, including even in deciding when >> to concede a lawsuit. But this is a case of an Attorney General publicly >> suggesting that an official decision of his was made by virtue of "Jesus's >> directive." And in an Establishment Clause case, at that! >> >> I don't think it is necessarily unconstitutional for a state official to >> make decisions based upon injunctions of religious authorities (or, at >> least, that's not typically justiciable); but I do think it is >> inappropriate to publicly invoke such religious authority in explaining the >> basis for one's action on behalf of the state. I've been involved in many >> such decisions, and can't imagine any government official so much as >> proposing to invoke Jesus's authority as the basis for an appeal decision, >> let alone actually announcing it. >> >> If, however, my reaction is not universally shared (or my experiences are >> less-than-universal), please feel free to ignore the final word of my post >> -- suffice it to say that, at a minimum, an AG invoking Jesus certainly is >> noteworthy, whatever one thinks of its propriety. >> >> On Thu, Jul 14, 2016 at 11:05 AM, Michael Worley <mwor...@byulaw.net> >> wrote: >> >>> Marty, I, for one, would be curious what you meant by "sigh." >>> >>> On Thu, Jul 14, 2016 at 8:47 AM, Marty Lederman < >>> lederman.ma...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> He claims he didn't appeal because "I don’t believe that’s the way to >>>> carry out Jesus’ primary directives to protect the least among us and to >>>> love thy neighbor." >>>> >>>> Sigh. >>>> >>>> On Thu, Jul 14, 2016 at 10:44 AM, Friedman, Howard M. < >>>> howard.fried...@utoledo.edu> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Issuing a strong statement, Mississippi's attorney general says he >>>>> will not appeal Judge Reeves' decision >>>>> >>>>> http://religionclause.blogspot.com/2016/07/mississippi-ag-will-not-appeal.html >>>>> >>>>> ------------------------------ >>>>> >>>>> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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. >> > > > > -- > Michael Worley > J.D., Brigham Young University > -- Michael Worley J.D., Brigham Young University
_______________________________________________ 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.
