RE: Bowman v. U.S.

2009-05-05 Thread Marc Stern
Would the result be the same if a school required community service, but
prohibited students from fulfilling that obligation in a religious
setting, or excluding say Sunday school teaching from the list of
permissible placements?
Marc Stern

-Original Message-
From: religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu
[mailto:religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of
hamilto...@aol.com
Sent: Monday, May 04, 2009 7:51 PM
To: Law  Religion issues for Law Academics
Subject: Re: Bowman v. U.S.

While speech is involved in the classroom, career preparation is more
involved than just speech.  The state is not simply handing out funds
for the sheer joy of learning or enriching discourse. The state funding
of ministers or rabbis for that matter is a direct and knowing benefit
to  religious institutions. That is different from the abstract
treatment of learning as nothing but a discourse of speech.
Marci 

--Original Message--
From: Volokh, Eugene
Sender: religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu
To: Law  Religion issues for Law Academics
ReplyTo: Law  Religion issues for Law Academics
Sent: May 4, 2009 7:41 PM
Subject: RE: Bowman v. U.S.

What exactly is it about government-funded education directed at
future careers that keeps it from being pure speech?  It presumably
wouldn't just be the government funding, since that was at issue in
Rosenberger as well.  I take it the theory must be that education is
somehow more than just pure speech, in constitutionally significant
ways.  But why, especially when we're talking about education that
basically just involves talking, rather than science labs, football
games, and the like?

Marci Hamilton writes:

 In any event, this is not pure speech -- it is government funding
education directed
 at future careers.

___
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.


Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry
___
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: Bowman v. U.S.

2009-05-05 Thread Rick Duncan
Liberty Counsel had a case such as the one Marc describes. It settled favorably.

Here is the Liberty Counsel press release concerning the settlement of the case:

January 29, 2008

School Board Settles Lawsuit By Amending Policy and Accepting Student’s 
Community Service Hours at Church

Long
Beach, CA – The Long Beach District School Board has approved a
settlement agreement with Christopher Rand, a high school student who
was denied credit for community service hours he completed at his
church. Chris has now received full credit for the hours. The district
administration also rewrote its community service learning policy to
allow students to complete mandatory community service hours at either
secular or religious organizations, including churches, on the same
terms.

In October 2007, Liberty Counsel filed a lawsuit
against the district because Chris’s school refused to grant credit for
more than 70 hours of community service, solely because it was
performed at Long Beach Alliance Church. He interacted with the
children in the church’s programs, answered questions, assisted with
crafts and art projects, supervised activity time to help ensure
safety, and performed other duties.

After Chris
submitted the required documentation regarding his volunteer service,
he was denied credit because the district’s prior community service
learning policy stated, “Service to your religious community does not
count.” If Christopher had given the same service in a secular school
or in a nonreligious childcare program, his service would have been
credited. Shortly after Liberty Counsel filed suit, the district agreed
to award Chris credit for the full 72.5 hours that had previously been
rejected.

In addition to giving Chris credit for his
community service, the district accepted input from Liberty Counsel in
revising its policy to comply with the First Amendment. Under the new
policy, religious organizations will receive the same treatment as
other nonprofit organizations in terms of the types of community
service work that is permitted. Students are expressly allowed to
supervise and assist with leading organized children’s activities, such
as those performed by Chris. The district also agreed to pay attorney’s
fees and costs to Liberty Counsel.

Mathew D. Staver,
Founder of Liberty Counsel and Dean of Liberty University School of
Law, commented: “When community service is a graduation requirement,
schools cannot limit service to secular venues. Discrimination against
performing community service for religious organizations violates the
First Amendment and offends the rich religious heritage that made this
country great.”


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




--- On Tue, 5/5/09, Marc Stern mst...@ajcongress.org wrote:

From: Marc Stern mst...@ajcongress.org
Subject: RE: Bowman v. U.S.
To: hamilto...@aol.com, Law  Religion issues for Law Academics 
religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu
Date: Tuesday, May 5, 2009, 7:25 AM

Would the result be the same if a school required community service, but
prohibited students from fulfilling that obligation in a religious
setting, or excluding say Sunday school teaching from the list of
permissible placements?
Marc Stern

-Original Message-
From: religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu
[mailto:religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of
hamilto...@aol.com
Sent: Monday, May 04, 2009 7:51 PM
To: Law  Religion issues for Law Academics
Subject: Re: Bowman v. U.S.

While speech is involved in the classroom, career preparation is more
involved than just speech.  The state is not simply handing out funds
for the sheer joy of learning or enriching discourse. The state funding
of ministers or rabbis for that matter is a direct and knowing benefit
to  religious institutions. That is different from the abstract
treatment of learning as nothing but a discourse of speech.
Marci 

--Original Message--
From: Volokh, Eugene
Sender: religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu
To: Law  Religion issues for Law Academics
ReplyTo: Law  Religion issues for Law Academics
Sent: May 4, 2009 7:41 PM
Subject: RE: Bowman v. U.S.

    What exactly is it about government-funded education directed at
future careers that keeps it from being pure speech?  It presumably
wouldn't just be the government funding, since that was at issue in
Rosenberger as well.  I take it the theory must be that education is
somehow more than just pure speech, in constitutionally significant
ways.  But why, especially when we're talking about education that
basically just involves talking, rather than science labs, football
games, and the like?

Marci Hamilton writes:

 In any event, this is not pure speech -- it is government funding
education directed
 at future careers.

___
To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu To subscribe,
unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see

Query from a lawyer

2009-05-05 Thread Volokh, Eugene
A lawyer who's working on an Establishment Clause case asked me this question, 
and I thought I'd pass it along:  I was wondering if you knew ... about any 
recent cases--on any level--or law review articles that do a particularly good 
job discussing the current state of the Lemon test.  I'm finding--and it seems 
like courts are finding--very confusing exactly what Agostini did to Lemon and 
how courts are applying Lemon-Agostini.  Any suggestions?  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.


Summum Edited Opinion

2009-05-05 Thread Rick Duncan
Does anyone know of a link to a good edited version of Summum? I am teaching a 
First Amendment Course this summer, and I would like to assign an edited 
version of the case (with a link for students to access it).

Thanks, Rick

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





  ___
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.

Summum

2009-05-05 Thread Rick Duncan
Never mind. I found a link to an edited version of the Summum opinion. It is 
here if others are interested.

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






  ___
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: Query from a lawyer

2009-05-05 Thread Steven Jamar
LOL!

Sorry.  I know this is serious.  I feel his/her pain.  I have nothing to
offer to help.  But perhaps it may be of some comfort to the lawyer that at
least some of us who consider these matters with some frequency can't be
particularly helpful -- or if we are being helpful in some concrete way, we
can be pretty sure that others of equal or greater expertise will see it at
least 2 other ways.

Steve

On Tue, May 5, 2009 at 12:36 PM, Volokh, Eugene vol...@law.ucla.edu wrote:

 A lawyer who's working on an Establishment Clause case asked me this
 question, and I thought I'd pass it along:  I was wondering if you knew ...
 about any recent cases--on any level--or law review articles that do a
 particularly good job discussing the current state of the Lemon test.  I'm
 finding--and it seems like courts are finding--very confusing exactly what
 Agostini did to Lemon and how courts are applying Lemon-Agostini.  Any
 suggestions?  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.




-- 
Prof. Steven Jamar
Howard University School of Law
Associate Director, Institute of Intellectual Property and Social Justice
(IIPSJ) Inc.
___
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: Query from a lawyer

2009-05-05 Thread hamilton02
There is no reason for him to think he can find the holy grail of Lemon.  On 
these issues, litigators have to argue both/and, not either/or.

Marci
Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry

-Original Message-
From: Steven Jamar stevenja...@gmail.com

Date: Tue, 5 May 2009 14:05:07 
To: Law  Religion issues for Law Academicsreligionlaw@lists.ucla.edu
Subject: Re: Query from a lawyer


___
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.