Doug's Harvard Comment on Newdow and
Davey is now available online at http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/118/1_laycock.pdf.
I haven't read it yet, but in light of Doug's amicus briefs in both cases (as
well as his contributions to this list regarding both of them), I'm willing to
wager
Dear all,
FYI:
On October 29, Judge McKenna of the S.D.N.Y. ruled in a case brought by the
Fifth Avenue Presbyterian Church, seeking a permanent injunction
preventing the City of New York . . . from dispersing homeless persons
sleeping, at the Church's invitation, in the landings at the tops of
I guess that would count
for whatever weight the jury gives it. With the right (wrong) jury, it
might be evidence of redemption or whatever. Why withhold the information
whatever the sect?
-Original Message-From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]On Behalf Of
GIven the violence of white supremacist gangs in the prisons, I cannot imagine that any lawyer would permit his client to raise his membership in the Aryan Brotherhood or the KKK. For what purpose would the denominational choice be relevant? If it is to let the jurors attach to the convict
If no lawyer would let his client mention
it, why worry about it for Establishment Clause purposes as you did in your first
post?
Marc Stern
From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, November 12, 2004
11:34 AM
To: [EMAIL
Dear all,
Nate Oman asked me to forward this to the list:
Eugene,
The issue in Payton is actually (not
surprisingly) narrower than portrayed by USA Today. It has to do
with the issue of whether or not Paton was entitled to an instruction
that under the rather inelegantly worded California
Marc makes a good point, but say that there is a dispute about whether the
particular strain of, say, Islam -- or for that matter, Christianity -- to
which the defendant has converted is a religion of peace or a religion that
allows or even suggests violence that U.S. law would condemn. What
Let me suggest an analogy, one that is hardly on all fours but that I thought
might be relevant: As I understand it, rules of evidence generally bar the
factfinder from considering a person's religiosity as evidence of honesty
(setting aside the question whether membership in a particular
Eugene's response moves me to reveal a secret heretical thought I have
harbored for some time now-that the religion clauses (and much else in the
constitution) were simply not written with anything like modern life in
mind, that government has become so complex that the simple rules the
founders
Unfortunately as a factual mater there is no necessary relationship between
church (= house of worship) attendance and probity.
Marc Stern
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Volokh, Eugene
Sent: Friday, November 12, 2004 12:06 PM
To: [EMAIL
Except for the Society of Friends, the Mennonites and a few other
pietistic faiths, please tell me what religion out there qualifies as a
religion of peace?
Pual Finkelman
Volokh, Eugene wrote:
Marc makes a good point, but say that there is a dispute about whether the particular strain of, say,
Title: RE: Religious faith as evidence of honesty or future dangerousness .:.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Volokh, Eugene
Sent: Friday, November 12, 2004 9:06 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Religious faith as evidence of
Dear all,
Thanks very much to Michael for forwarding the Florida court's decision. I
am not surprised by the result, but I am surprised by (what I regard as)
the court's failure meaningfully to confront the original social meaning
and purpose of Florida's no-aid provision and other similar
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
Buddhism.
On Friday, November 12, 2004, at 12:26 PM, Paul Finkelman wrote:
Except for the Society of Friends, the Mennonites and a few other
pietistic faiths, please tell me what religion out there qualifies as
a religion of peace?
Pual Finkelman
--
Prof. Steven D. Jamar
Rick's thoughtful post reminded me of an issue I had planned to raise on
the list but never got around to. Having read only a few pieces by early
writers, such as the Elisha Williams excerpt in the McConnell, Garvey,
Berg, Religion and the Constitution casebook, I was struck by the
Title: Re: Religion of peace? .:.
You say religion of peace. Perhaps you mean religion of pacifism (not the same, see Brish Quakers circa 1939). Thus rephrased, point taken.
Richard Menard
Sidley Austin Brown Wood
202-736-8016 (office)
202-246-7408 (mobile)
-Original Message-
17 matches
Mail list logo
