I think the problem in either plaintiffs case is that their property is
in a public domain, not private. Public corporations do not have any
'rights' guaranteed by constitutional law, only privileges and rights
granted to them by legislative decree and case law.
I think the MN case will be a no contest. If the churches object to the
placement of signs as decreed by law, then why not object to
'Illuminated in Red letter' exit signs, or placement of fire
extinguishers, or the mandatory minimal width of their doors, or
required lighting standards, or handicap parking signs and ramps, or any
of a dozen other regulations that they are require to obey in order to
remain a public entity? Such laws have been uniformly upheld for decades
or longer and this one should prove no different.
_______________________________________________
To post, send message to [email protected]
To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see
http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/firearmsregprof
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.
