| Some of the listmembers seem to be losing sight of the fact that the judge wrote his opinion after a bench trial. It's completely appropriate for the trier of fact to state conclusions about the credibility of the witnesses and the motivations of various characters in the underlying events. I did, however, think it went too far for the judge to express moral outrage about the inconsistency between purporting to be religious and then lying and deceiving the court. The judge called that ironic, which is rather amusing, because one could say he was making a religious judgment -- quite ironically! He should keep his opinions secular, I should think.
Ann In a message dated 12/20/2005 12:42:08 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: One can be careful and sensitive about intruding on the authority of local boards of education without abdicating to them. If in a particular case a school board acts in plainly unconstitutional way and a judge shoots it down, there is no proof that the judge is being intemperate or less than even handed. Unless of course, Jim intends that the careful and sensitive judge can never challenge what a school board does-but the ACLJ asks judges to override school official judgments all the time. Are judges who uphold ACLJ claims insensitive and biasaed? Fair enough, Marc. Although as I sit here, I am at a loss from my own cases or those within our past caseload with which I am familiar where the dispute was one that called for a judge to wrest control from the local board over the pedagogical components of a school. We have certainly asked courts to issue injunctions and declarations regarding the Equal Access Act or regarding First Amendment rights of students to share their faith or political views. But I am thinking that perhaps you have confused the ACLJ with another one, for the reason stated above. Now, I should also say that I do not think the fact that the judge wrests control is dispositive of the issue; instead, as I indicated in my first response to Ann's posting, and in my answer to Steven's criticism, the snippet clipped by Ann leaves an impression of a very distinct bias. What would have been wrong with a decision edited to be from such evidence of bias? What judicial distemper inspires the insistence that folks know exactly how a judge feels? Jim Henderson Senior Counsel ACLJ _______________________________________________
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.
