Sorry: The font on that
post came through garbled for some reason. Here it is again.
I agree with Eugene that theres
not much of a compelled speech problem here, for reasons the Court explained
in Southworth. (Of course, its not quite as easy as
that, because of cases such as Dale,
Title: Message
In earlier case, Peck v Upshur County, dealing
with distribution of literature to students from tables-a policy far preferable
to the one upheld yesterday by the Fourth Circuitthe Fourth Circuit held
that a public forum was created by the school when it allowed distribution
Marty says they allowed 389 out of 402 requests. That is
consistent with applying a child-adjusted compelling interest test,
rejecting only those that violate Tinker or Bethel, and probably a few more
that the school finds objectionable on some ground that it might or might
not be
In a message dated 7/1/04 11:36:03 AM Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
My claim was not that there is no viewpoint discrimination: My argument is that there is tons of viewpoint discrimination in such programs, constantly, and that there's nothing constitutionally problematic
There is some merit in Doug's argument. But it seems to me there is a real
problem with a school district stating that it only distributes materials
directly related to the curriculum that it explicitly approves while at the
same time having courts conclude that there is no endorsement of the
Doug,
Was the condiminium corporation at issue here a public housing facility, or does the
Charter of Rights apply to private actors as well?
Nate Oman
-- Original Message --
From: Douglas Laycock [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: Law Religion issues for Law
I wondered that too, but I don't know the answer. A reliable
friend sent me the release, and it contains all I know.
At 03:52 PM 7/1/2004 -0400, you wrote:
Doug,
Was the condiminium corporation at issue here a public housing facility,
or does the Charter of Rights apply to private
THE OPINION IS AT
WWW.LEXUM.UMONTREAL.CA/CSC-SCC/EN/REC/HTML/2004SCC047.WPD.HTM
Marc STERN
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Nathan Oman
Sent: Thursday, July 01, 2004 2:52 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Law Religion issues for Law Academics
The Canadian Charter of Rights carries a state action requirement, although
the contours of state action doctrine differ somewhat from those in the U.S.
The B'Nai Brith case was actually decided under a provincial statute, the
Quebec Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and I am less familiar with
