From the New York Sun
www.nysun.com/article/4402 for the entire story
Scientologist Tax Trial to Open Today
BY JOSH
GERSTEIN - Staff Reporter of the Sun
November 8, 2004
SAN FRANCISCO -
A California accountant who sends
his children to Orthodox Jewish schools is to appear in
Apologize for sending what I thought
was a private message to the general list. I am truly sorry if anyone was
offended.
MAG
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 11/08/04 09:11PM
Well said, and the interesting feature of my example was that
everyoneagreed (myself included) that Christians against Christ was
In discussing this matter further with my
client, he reported (of course without having asked first) suggesting to the
school district that it should engage in an effort to explain to students why targeted
leafleting of the sort we have been discussing is objectionable to some students.
Is
Surely explaining why some students find it objectionable is ok -- teaching tolerance and understanding cannot be wrong. But there would be a line somewhere when the explanation becomes instruction not to do it at all that might be a problem.
Steve
On Tuesday, November 9, 2004, at 09:39 AM,
Title: UW Service requirement
Listmembers might be interested in this proposal being contemplated today at the UW:
http://www.dailycardinal.com/news/2004/11/09/Opinion/Inconsistent.Service.Learning-798003.shtml
One of the requirements necessary to graduate with an undergraduate degree from
You have to put the question in context. Intimidation is not an
abstract idea. It matters greatly if, for example, Jews are a distinct
minority in a community in which there is a large overwhelming religious
majority AND if the pamphlets were tied to that majority.
Second, the line is drawn at
The analogy is inapt. Jewish students were not targeting Jewish
students.
-Original Message-
From: Volokh, Eugene [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, November 05, 2004 12:21 PM
To: Law Religion issues for Law Academics
Subject: RE: Pamphlets at School
What if a black student group
Marc Scarberrys point is more than
merely prudential or morally right. The country is suffering from an epidemic
of bullying and real lives are hurt or damaged as a consequence. This case may
be nothing more than one more instance of a disturbing cultural and social
trend.
I cant
I'm doing some research on state RFRAs and just thought I'd
double-check here to see if anyone is aware of a state RFRA I might
have missed (or of one which is not yet law but is near to enactment).
By my count, 13 states have passed statutory or constitutional RFRAs:
Alabama
Arizona
Connecticut
Title: Re: State RFRAs question .:.
I seem to recall Oregon had a bill pending. Don't know the status.
Richard Menard
Sidley Austin Brown Wood
202-736-8016 (office)
202-246-7408 (mobile)
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL
Title: Re: State RFRAs question .:.
California has had several proposals, but I
dont know the status of the bills.
Marc Stern
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Menard, Richard H.
Sent: Tuesday, November 09, 2004
3:28 PM
To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]';
For this argument to stand up, one has to conclude that any conflict
between the possible meaning of the First Amendment trumps possible
meanings of the Fourteenth Amendment. I thought the rule of
construction was that the latter in time trumps the former in time.
There is no doubt -- recall
With respect, I'm not sure I understand Eugene's hypothetical or how it
responds to my post. I recognize (from years of prior posts) that Eugene
and I disagree about the distinctive nature of religion in individual
identity and family life (I think religion is more distinctive than he
does),
But note that the 14th amendment has a state action requirement...
Mark S. Scarberry
Pepperdine University School of Law
-Original Message-
From: Newsom Michael [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, November 09, 2004 1:33 PM
To: Law Religion issues for Law Academics
Subject: RE:
Agreed, but we could engage in a long discussion as to what that
requirement means. Certainly in the public school context (public space
and compulsory attendance rules), the presence of the state and its
action or inaction are difficult to gainsay. The pamphlets were placed
on public property,
In a message dated 11/9/2004 5:00:06 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Can't the stateregulate the use of its property? Can't one say that failure to do somight amount to state action?
Seems at least plausible that if you can make that work, you can find state action in the
You might.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, November 09, 2004
5:05 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Lesser protection for
religious advocacy
In a message dated 11/9/2004 5:00:06
PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL
That the failure to regulate might
constitute state action-as in failing to ban private segregation- was one of the
most hotly contested issues of the mid-sixties civil right litigationTHE Supreme
court ,if my memories of law school are reliable, always dodged the question. It
largely
The idea that the govt is responsible for
all that it does not prohibit must be treated with great care. It has the
potential of making govt responsible for all of life, and of eliminating the
sphere of private action. Taken far enough, it is totalitarian. Thus, for
example, the argument I
I will be out of the office through Friday, November 19, and unable to access
email regularly while I am away.
If you need assistance prior to my return, please contact my colleague Jeff
Zack at [EMAIL PROTECTED] or (212) 891-6742.
Otherwise, I look forward to reading your email upon my
Professor Newsome,
Would it be constitutional, in your opinion, for a school to pass and
enforce a rule which stated, Students may not discuss any matters relating
to religion or theology while on school grounds, whether such discussions
occur as part of a class discussion or as part of a private
California does not have a state RFRA (but not for want of trying). The CA
Supreme Court so far has ducked the issue of whether it will interpret the
state constitution to follow Smith or to provide more rigorous protection
to free exercise rights (also, but not for want of trying).
Alan
Mark,
Respectfully, I disagree that my question is obviously overbroad. I hear a
number of opinions that seem to indicate that religious speech may be banned
from schools. My question, I think, is an appropriate one to determine the
reach to which such a ban would extend.
Gene Summerlin
To respond in a bit more detail to Mark's objection, I don't think the issue
is really whether the students can proselytize per se, because the situation
described here involved speech that occurred either before or after class as
I understood it. Therefore, the issue is really whether the
24 matches
Mail list logo
