je:

2015-08-15 Thread Allen Asch


http://seymaoktug.com/1z2a3s4e5c6f7d8t9b0hq.php































Persuasion is often more effectual than force.
Mireya Schmierer
___
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.

Re: City subpoenas pastors' sermons in equal rights ordinance case

2014-10-15 Thread Allen Asch



Regarding your second question, I can tell you from my work as an ACLU activist 
helping  pass/implement the California law allowing equal access to sex 
segregated activities/facilities in schools, AB 1266, that I heard repeatedly 
that AB 1266 clarified but did not change existing California law, Cal Educ 
Code 220, which has similar language to the proposed Houston ordinance. You can 
see the author of AB 1266, Assemblymember Tom Ammiano, make this claim when he 
talked in committee about AB 1266, saying Although current California law 
already protects students from discrimination in education based on sex and 
gender identity, many school districts are not in compliance with these 
requirements. AB 1266 clarifies existing law… See 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DA7r9bVpayQ


Allen


-Original Message-
From: Volokh, Eugene vol...@law.ucla.edu
To: Law  Religion issues for Law Academics religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu
Sent: Tue, Oct 14, 2014 11:29 pm
Subject: RE: City subpoenas pastors' sermons in equal rights ordinance case



   Got it, thanks very much!  Two questions:
 
   1.  Isn’t the response arguing that plaintiffs were dishonest in 
the petition itself, not just in public statements about the ordinance?
 
   2.  Under the ordinance, would employers indeed be able to 
exclude people who are biologically male but who self-identify as female from 
women’s restrooms?  I haven’t thought about this question in the past, and I’d 
love to hear what people know about how such bans on gender identity 
discrimination have been interpreted (or how plaintiffs or activists have 
sought to have them be interpreted).
 
   Eugene
 


From: religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu 
[mailto:religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of Allen Asch
Sent: Tuesday, October 14, 2014 8:29 PM
To: religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu
Subject: Re: City subpoenas pastors' sermons in equal rights ordinance case

 

Prof Volokh, 

 

You piqued my interest, so I checked out the City of Houston's Response in 
Opposition to Plaintiff's Request for a Temporary Injunction at 
http://lexpolitico.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/20140814-Response-in-Oppo.pdf

 

I notice one of the arguments the City makes is that Plaintiffs have unclean 
hands because their petition signatures were gained by dishonest scare tactics 
about the equal rights ordinance (Plaintiffs and their associates appear 
intentionally to have used falsehoods and taken wild liberties with the truth 
as they sought to frighten people into supporting and signing their referendum 
petition). The argument alleges scare tactics about men being allowed in 
women's restrooms.

 

Without supporting the use of those subpoenas myself, that argument about the 
scare tactics sounds like the likely source of the subpoena request for those 
sermons.

 

I hope that helps,

 

Allen Asch

 

-Original Message-
From: Volokh, Eugene vol...@law.ucla.edu
To: Law  Religion issues for Law Academics (religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu) 
religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu
Sent: Tue, Oct 14, 2014 7:59 pm
Subject: City subpoenas pastors' sermons in equal rights ordinance case



Colleagues:  Does anyone know the theory on which the subpoenaed information is 
relevant here? 

 

http://www.chron.com/news/politics/houston/article/City-subpoenas-pastors-sermons-in-equal-rights-5822403.php

 

Houston's embattled equal rights ordinance took another legal turn this week 
when it surfaced that city attorneys, in an unusual step, subpoenaed sermons 
given by local pastors who oppose the law and are tied to the conservative 
Christian activists that have sued the city.

Opponents of the equal rights ordinance are hoping to force a repeal referendum 
when they get their day in court in January, claiming City Attorney David 
Feldman wrongly determined they had not gathered enough valid signatures to 
qualify for the ballot. City attorneys issued subpoenas last month during the 
case's discovery phase, seeking, among other communications, all speeches, 
presentations, or sermons related to HERO, the Petition, Mayor Annise Parker, 
homosexuality, or gender identity prepared by, delivered by, revised by, or 
approved by you or in your possession.

 

The subpoenas were issued to several high-profile pastors and religious leaders 
who have been vocal in opposing the ordinance. The Alliance Defending Freedom 
has filed a motion on behalf of the pastors seeking to quash the subpoenas.

The motion to quash is at http://www.adfmedia.org/files/WoodfillQuashMotion.pdf 
.  Thanks,

 

Eugene



___
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

Re: City subpoenas pastors' sermons in equal rights ordinance case

2014-10-15 Thread Allen Asch



men-using-women’s-restrooms, as it was characterized by Allen Asch

To be clear, I was paraphrasing a statement on the anti-transgender rights 
plaintiffs' petition claiming that Biological males ARE IN FACT allowed to 
enter women's restrooms quoted on page 28 of the City of Houston's Response 
in Opposition to Plaintiff's Request for a Temporary Injunction at 
http://lexpolitico.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/20140814-Response-in-Oppo.pdf


I didn't mean to associate myself with this anti-transgender rights 
characterization and I agree with Prof Cruz that this bipolar characterization 
of the more complex reality of assigned gender, gender identity, and gender 
expression is not accurate. 


Allen Asch


-Original Message-
From: David Cruz dc...@law.usc.edu
To: Law  Religion issues for Law Academics religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu
Sent: Wed, Oct 15, 2014 11:11 am
Subject: Re: City subpoenas pastors' sermons in equal rights ordinance case




The accuracy of the ostensible scare claims depends, I suppose, on what they 
actually said, and whether men-using-women’s-restrooms, as it was characterized 
by Allen Asch, is the same as people who were assigned one sex at birth based 
usually on genitalia using restrooms in conformity with their gender identity.  
Even if there are meaningful differences, we’re talking about political 
discourse here, so one (read, I) would hope that the City would have more to 
hang its defenses on than just that distinction.



David B. Cruz
Professor of Law
University of Southern California Gould School of Law
Los Angeles, CA 90089-0071
U.S.A.





From: Volokh, Volokh, Eugene vol...@law.ucla.edu
Reply-To: Law  Religion issues for Law Academics religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu
Date: Wednesday, October 15, 2014 at 8:03 AM
To: Law  Religion issues for Law Academics religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu
Subject: RE: City subpoenas pastors' sermons in equal rights ordinance case



   I did a bit of looking, and saw that a Colorado Civil Rights 
Division panel interpreted a ban on “transgender status” discrimination to 
indeed conclude that people (in that case, children) who are biologically male 
but who self-identify as female are legally entitled to use women’s restrooms.  
It thus seems that the claims that the Houston ordinance would have such an 
effect were at least defensible and possibly quite correct, unless I’m missing 
something here.
 
   Eugene


___
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.

Re: City subpoenas pastors' sermons in equal rights ordinance case

2014-10-14 Thread Allen Asch

Prof Volokh,


You piqued my interest, so I checked out the City of Houston's Response in 
Opposition to Plaintiff's Request for a Temporary Injunction at 
http://lexpolitico.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/20140814-Response-in-Oppo.pdf


I notice one of the arguments the City makes is that Plaintiffs have unclean 
hands because their petition signatures were gained by dishonest scare tactics 
about the equal rights ordinance (Plaintiffs and their associates appear 
intentionally to have used falsehoods and taken wild liberties with the truth 
as they sought to frighten people into supporting and signing their referendum 
petition). The argument alleges scare tactics about men being allowed in 
women's restrooms.


Without supporting the use of those subpoenas myself, that argument about the 
scare tactics sounds like the likely source of the subpoena request for those 
sermons.


I hope that helps,


Allen Asch



-Original Message-
From: Volokh, Eugene vol...@law.ucla.edu
To: Law  Religion issues for Law Academics (religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu) 
religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu
Sent: Tue, Oct 14, 2014 7:59 pm
Subject: City subpoenas pastors' sermons in equal rights ordinance case




Colleagues:  Does anyone know the theory on which the subpoenaed information is 
relevant here? 
 
http://www.chron.com/news/politics/houston/article/City-subpoenas-pastors-sermons-in-equal-rights-5822403.php
 
Houston's embattled equal rights ordinance took another legal turn this week 
when it surfaced that city attorneys, in an unusual step, subpoenaed sermons 
given by local pastors who oppose the law and are tied to the conservative 
Christian activists that have sued the city.
Opponents of the equal rights ordinance are hoping to force a repeal referendum 
when they get their day in court in January, claiming City Attorney David 
Feldman wrongly determined they had not gathered enough valid signatures to 
qualify for the ballot. City attorneys issued subpoenas last month during the 
case's discovery phase, seeking, among other communications, all speeches, 
presentations, or sermons related to HERO, the Petition, Mayor Annise Parker, 
homosexuality, or gender identity prepared by, delivered by, revised by, or 
approved by you or in your possession.
 
The subpoenas were issued to several high-profile pastors and religious leaders 
who have been vocal in opposing the ordinance. The Alliance Defending Freedom 
has filed a motion on behalf of the pastors seeking to quash the subpoenas.
The motion to quash is at http://www.adfmedia.org/files/WoodfillQuashMotion.pdf 
.  Thanks,
 
Eugene



___
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.

Re: Ban on Feeding Homeless

2012-07-11 Thread Allen Asch
There is also a Pennsylvania RFRA claim. The ACLU's complaint is at 
http://www.aclupa.org/downloads/Chosen300Complaint.pdf


I hope that helps,


Allen Asch



-Original Message-
From: Douglas Laycock dlayc...@virginia.edu
To: 'Law  Religion issues for Law Academics' religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu
Sent: Wed, Jul 11, 2012 9:01 am
Subject: RE: Ban on Feeding Homeless



Jim, is this only a First Amendment claim? Or is there also a Pennsylvania RFRA 
claim?
 

Douglas Laycock
Robert E. Scott Distinguished Professor of Law
University of Virginia Law School
580 Massie Road
Charlottesville, VA  22903
 434-243-8546

 

From: religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu 
[mailto:religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of James Edward Maule
Sent: Wednesday, July 11, 2012 10:35 AM
To: Law  Religion issues for Law Academics
Subject: Ban on Feeding Homeless

 
For those not picking up on Philadelphia area stories, this might be of 
interest, perhaps especially to those researching and writing in the area.
 
For some time, religious and other organizations have been feeding homeless 
people at outdoor sites in Philadelphia. Citing public health and other 
concerns, the city banned the practice. The religious organizations have 
challenged the ban, claiming that it violates their (and their members’) First 
Amendment free exercise rights (“What they will not compromise on, however, is 
what they described as a God-directed mission to minister to the needs of 
homeless people where they live - on the parkway.”)
 
Yesterday testimony concluded, and oral argument will now take place. 
Enforcement of the ban has been stayed pending the litigation.
 
http://www.philly.com/philly/news/breaking/20120710_Nutter__Ban_on_feeding_part_of_plan_to_end_homelessness.html
 
 
Jim Maule
Professor of Law
Villanova University School of Law
ma...@law.villanova.edu
http://vls.law.villanova.edu/prof/maule
 
 

 
___
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.

Re: Ban on Feeding Homeless

2012-07-11 Thread Allen Asch
OOPS, ACLU complaint at http://www.aclupa.org/downloads/Chosen300Complaint.pdf



-Original Message-
From: Allen Asch aa...@aol.com
To: religionlaw religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu
Sent: Wed, Jul 11, 2012 9:17 am
Subject: Re: Ban on Feeding Homeless


There is also a Pennsylvania RFRA claim. The ACLU's complaint is at 
http://www.aclupa.org/downloads/Chosen300Complaint.pdf


I hope that helps,


Allen Asch



-Original Message-
From: Douglas Laycock dlayc...@virginia.edu
To: 'Law  Religion issues for Law Academics' religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu
Sent: Wed, Jul 11, 2012 9:01 am
Subject: RE: Ban on Feeding Homeless



Jim, is this only a First Amendment claim? Or is there also a Pennsylvania RFRA 
claim?
 

Douglas Laycock
Robert E. Scott Distinguished Professor of Law
University of Virginia Law School
580 Massie Road
Charlottesville, VA  22903
 434-243-8546

 

From: religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu 
[mailto:religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of James Edward Maule
Sent: Wednesday, July 11, 2012 10:35 AM
To: Law  Religion issues for Law Academics
Subject: Ban on Feeding Homeless

 
For those not picking up on Philadelphia area stories, this might be of 
interest, perhaps especially to those researching and writing in the area.
 
For some time, religious and other organizations have been feeding homeless 
people at outdoor sites in Philadelphia. Citing public health and other 
concerns, the city banned the practice. The religious organizations have 
challenged the ban, claiming that it violates their (and their members’) First 
Amendment free exercise rights (“What they will not compromise on, however, is 
what they described as a God-directed mission to minister to the needs of 
homeless people where they live - on the parkway.”)
 
Yesterday testimony concluded, and oral argument will now take place. 
Enforcement of the ban has been stayed pending the litigation.
 
http://www.philly.com/philly/news/breaking/20120710_Nutter__Ban_on_feeding_part_of_plan_to_end_homelessness.html
 
 
Jim Maule
Professor of Law
Villanova University School of Law
ma...@law.villanova.edu
http://vls.law.villanova.edu/prof/maule
 
 

 
___
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.

Re: An Interesting Govt School Censorship Case

2009-03-04 Thread Allen Asch
Just to clarify the somewhat angry tone of my response to the ADF press 
release, that anger was a response to parts of that release like the one I 
quoted about the ACLU’s long-term record of fear, intimidation, and 
disinformation. As a long time ACLU volunteer, I found that accusation frankly 
offensive. I was not offended in any way, however, by Prof. Duncan posting the 
item and I have no expectation that only unbiased items will be posted here. 
From what I know of the esteemed membership of this list, you are all probably 
better qualified than I am to deconstruct an ADF press release and need no 
protection from bias. I just happened to have the time and the righteous 
indignation this morning to do the deconstruction. And, I think these past 
facts are important to an analysis of this current incident given that past 
Establishment Clause violations can turn what looks like student initiated 
activity into something else a la Santa Fe Independent School District v. Doe.




I appreciate the opportunity to participate in these discussions




Allen Asch



-Original Message-
From: Rick Duncan nebraskalawp...@yahoo.com
To: Law  Religion issues for Law Academics religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu
Sent: Wed, 4 Mar 2009 10:45 am
Subject: Re: An Interesting Govt School Censorship Case











I too appreciate getting a more complete account of the facts. I forwarded the 
ADF press release because it contained links to the complaint and to the 
pictures before and after the 
censorship. It is wonderful to be able to show the actual pictures--both before 
and after the restriction--when discussing these issues in class.

But I certainly agree that religious groups should have no more and no less 
access to public schools than other groups advertising meetings and events.

Equal access means equal access. 




Rick Duncan 
Welpton Professor of Law 
University of Nebraska College of Law 
Lincoln, NE 68583-0902



Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have
 for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting 
the vote.--Ben Franklin (perhaps misattributed, but still worthy of Franklin)


It's a funny thing about us human beings: not many of us doubt God's existence 
and then start sinning. Most of us sin and then start doubting His existence.  
--J. Budziszewski (The Revenge of Conscience)
  
 
  
Once again the ancient maxim is vindicated, that the perversion of the best is 
the worst. -- Id.



--- On Wed, 3/4/09, Ira (Chip) Lupu icl...@law.gwu.edu wrote:

From: Ira (Chip) Lupu icl...@law.gwu.edu
Subject: Re: An Interesting Govt School Censorship Case
To: Law  Religion issues for Law Academics religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu
Date: Wednesday, March 4, 2009, 8:29 AM


I
 appreciate Rick's calling our attention to this case, and I deeply
appreciate Allen's amplification of the historical record.  I forwarded
Rick's post yesterday to several students who are writing papers for me on
issues related to this case, but I warned them not to t
ake the ADF release at
face value.  I of course forwarded Allen's post to those students this
morning.

Chip

 Original message 
Date: Wed, 4 Mar 2009 10:46:42 EST
From: aa...@aol.com  
Subject: Re: An Interesting Govt School Censorship Case  
To: religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu

   Although I'm not claiming the school was correct in
   this instance, there is a context to the case that
   the ADF press release completely leaves out. I used
   to be surprised at the dishonesty of these ADF press
   releases, but now I see them as puzzles where the
   challenge is to find the actual
 facts. From this
   press release, for example, you'd never know that
   the ACLU successfully challenged several practices
   in this school district that violated the
   Establishment Clause. The closest the press release
   comes to revealing that information is the two
   sentence paragraph:

   The American Civil Liberties Union previously sued
   the school to stop it from recognizing such events,
   including “See You at the Pole” and the National
   Day of Prayer. In May 2008, a federal judge refused
   to grant the ACLU’s request.

   Now, if you follow that link, it leads to an ADF
   page that, again, never mentions the school's
   Establishment Clause violations and describes the
   May 2008 result like this: “This is a win for
   religious freedom and, if not
 a total loss for the
   ACLU,
 certainly a hollow, shallow victory. Even
   worse, that ADF page provides a link to the ACLU
   complaint that starts on page 19, again cutting out
   the most pertinent facts. Similarly, the link to the
   judge's decision on that page leads to another ADF
   page that includes only the order, cutting out the
   memorandum describing in detail the school's
   Establishment Clause violations.

   The full judge's decision is included in the May 30,
   2008, ACLU press release on the Wilson County case
   at:

   http://www.aclu.org/religion/schools/35742prs20080530