Here's a fuller version of the statement from Seamus Hasson of the Becket Fund
that Marty references below:
In recent times it has been fashionable for lawyers to debate whether we have a
“living Constitution.” This debate was settled. We have a living
Constitution. Her name is Sandra Day
Rick for question 2.
QUESTION TWO
According to the Washington Post, theBecket
Fund for Religious Liberty yesterday issued a statement "thank God she's
retiring." Presumably this sentiment is thefunction of theview that
Justice O'Connor's jurisprudence has harmed
Aha. Justice O'Connor has written two majority opinions dealing with
the Religion Clauses: Lyng (1988) and Agostini v. Felton (1997).
(Howard Freidman's blog forgets Agostini.)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 07/02/05 8:50 AM
QUESTION ONE
Those of you who have already glanced over at Howard Friedman's
-0090
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Marty Lederman [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Law Religion issues for Law Academics
religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu
Sent: Sat Jul 02 12:59:59 2005
Subject: Re: Pop Quiz: Justice O'Connor and the Religion Clauses
I think Marci
issues for Law Academics
Subject: Re: Pop Quiz: Justice O'Connor and the Religion Clauses
I think Marci is right. O'Connor's position wasn't just technically
different than the majority in Smith. She recognized the value of
indeterminacy in this area. Even if the Supreme Court ruled against
could not predict the outcome of new cases.
Tom
_
From: Anthony Picarello [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sat 7/2/2005 6:39 PM
To: Law Religion issues for Law Academics
Subject: RE: Pop Quiz: Justice O'Connor and the Religion Clauses
Our posts may have just crossed, but just
