But Eugene, doesn't your solicitude for individuated, non-group focused jurisprudence in the area of rights trump everything for you here, like it has nearly always done for the S Ct in the death penalty cases? That is, every fact matters, and group-based analysis (one religious group or another) is per se not relevant?

I'm not arguing for this position, just surprised to see Eugene seem to take a position so at odds with his typical individual rights positions.

Steve


--
Prof. Steven D. Jamar vox: 202-806-8017
Howard University School of Law fax: 202-806-8428
2900 Van Ness Street NW mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Washington, DC 20008 http://www.law.howard.edu/faculty/pages/jamar


"I have the audacity to believe that peoples everywhere can have three meals a day for their bodies, education and culture for their minds, and dignity, equality and freedom for their spirits."

Martin Luther King, Jr., (1964, on accepting the Nobel Peace Prize)


_______________________________________________ To post, send message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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.

Reply via email to