Some additional information re: the theft, the perpetrator, and his/her motives:
http://www.desertdispatch.com/news/explaining-8465-anonymous-letter.html
Ira C. Lupu
F. Elwood & Eleanor Davis Professor of Law
George Washington University Law School
2000 H St., NW
Washington, DC 20052
(202)994-705
Eric:
I would need a thick and objective description of what happened at Washburn in
order to evaluate its significance in this larger argument. For example, what
was the Mormon student saying (or planning to say) about the Bible that caused
such consternation and conflict? Was there a back
Rick-- This strikes me as your desired interpretation of the law, not the law
as it stands.
and it does not reflect the case. Yours and CLS's reasoning leads to an
absolutely absurd result.
When we have a court telling a university or law school that it cannot
require all school-suppor
Chip -
Does the situation where the Mormon student shut down the Washburn chapter of
CLS represent the sort of "dynamism, openness and challenge" you are talking
about? (That's the real-life on-campus example you asked for earlier and was
cited in Petitioner's brief at page 33.)
That scenario
Alan asks a good question about the standard of review. This is a designated
public forum. The "reasonableness" standard (that is, reasonable in light of
the purposes of the forum) ordinarily applies to exclusion of speech content
(by subject matter, or by viewpoint, but the latter will be nev
Chip, the problem with the all comers policy, even if applied across the board,
is that it entirely destroys the ability of student expressive groups to
organize around a set of beliefs and viewpoints. It is not viewpoint
discriminatory (if applied to all), but it destroys all attempts to organi
On 5/12/2010 6:51 PM, hamilto...@aol.com wrote:
Here is my question-- why would anyone care about a "takeover"?
Wouldn't that just mean that a majority of the members voted in a
different slate of leaders? It's not like a dissenter could come in
and singlehandedly takeover a group, is it? T
The lower courts in Gilmore had enjoined the city from allowing
segregation academies-established to sidestep a public school
integration order-any use of city facilities, including parks and zoos
for field trips. The Court set aside this last part of the order on the
grounds,inter alia,that it tre
Just to make sure I understand your argument, Chip. Is it your position that
reasonableness is the appropriate standard of review in this case with regard
to the CLS freedom of association claims because CLS associational freedom will
not be substantially burdened by the Hastings policy? Or is t
Has anyone thought about how the theft of the Mojave Cross will affect the
legal issues on remand? Here are some recent factsan anonymous letter
now claims that the cross was taken by a Veteran who rejects Justice
Kennedys opinion and believes the cross should be removed and replaced
with a mor
Marc Stern is overstating the holding of Gilmore. Most of the opinion is about
a state action question -- whether the city is complicit in the segregation of
certain facilities. With respect to those private entities or groups with
which the city is not so complicit, Gilmore has a brief passag
Bob Jones tells us nothing about whether CLS associational rights would protect
it from an all comers policy imposed through, say, the application of
discrimination laws. Within the public forum context, however, it is not clear
to me that permitting the government to forbid status discriminatio
Actually, it is not true that the government cannot or does not impose
all-comer human rights policies on religions expecting government benefits
outside Hastings. That is the core of the Bob Jones Univ case. That is why I
raised race discrimination earlier
Marci
Sent from my Verizon Wirele
Marci Hamilton wrote:
Does the government have an obligation to make sure dwindling religions
remain viable. I would say absolutely not.
I agree. Think of the Shakers, for example.
Judy Baer
___
To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu
To sub
Marci wrote:
Of course the marketplace works as I described it especially in the US. Groups
thrive and shrivel and respond to and interact with the culture and if they
cannot adapt to broadbased moral and social changes by changing their beliefs
and practices, they become marginalized.
That re
As I and others have said repeatedly, there is no censorship or suppression.
No exclusion. Those are not the facts of this case
In any event, I was speaking about the larger picture. I am interested in
dis-covering the taboo that forbids us from discussing the obvious fact that
religious groups
Nothing CLS has said challenges Hastings' duty to enforce rules against
its own discrimination on the basis of inter alia sexual orientation or
religion. As Gilmore v. City of Montgomery holds, however, a city's duty
not to engage itself in (there racial) discrimination ) does not
authorize it to d
Marci says: "Groups thrive and shrivel and respond to and interact with the
culture
and if they cannot adapt to broadbased moral and social changes by
changing their beliefs and practices, they become marginalized."
I have no further questions of this witness.
Marci's admission--that groups
Hastings is not stopping the message. It is stopping an action. It
is not preventing CLS from saying anything it wants to say. It is
preventing it from discriminating on a basis the university considers
improper.
Christian students are allowed full participation in the life of the
law
Of course the marketplace works as I described it especially in the US. Groups
thrive and shrivel and respond to and interact with the culture and if they
cannot adapt to broadbased moral and social changes by changing their beliefs
and practices, they become marginalized. Groups spin off of oth
But is it a constitutional violation? I would tend to agree that the
government ought to accommodate religious associations and give them
equal access to government facilities and should grant religious
associations exemptions from certain non-discrimination rules that
apply to secular org
And since we are all going back and reading Elena Kagan's ruminations on the
role of motive in assessing speech restrictions, we might ask what Hastings
seeks to accomplish by prohibiting CLS from insisting upon its distinctive
creed as a condition of leadership or voting membership. What work d
Marci says: "It is not majoritarian but rather the marketplace. Expressive
association is a new right with little justification in history and I am
beginning to think a large step toward government sponsored
Balkanization
Does the government have an obligation to make sure
dwindling religions r
The right of expressive association is not a demand for government protection
in the market place of ideas or a demand for government support. It is, rather,
a shield against government compulsion, i.e., the demand that an organization
not define itself by adherance to any particular creed or th
It is not majoritarian but rather the marketplace. Expressive association is a
new right with little justification in history and I am beginning to think a
large step toward government sponsored Balkanization
Does the government have an obligation to make sure dwindling religions remain
viable.
25 matches
Mail list logo
