Chip, the problem with the all comers policy, even if applied across the board,
is that it entirely destroys the ability of student expressive groups to
organize around a set of beliefs and viewpoints. It is not viewpoint
discriminatory (if applied to all), but it destroys all attempts to organize on
the basis of viewpoint and belief.
It is like a rule that says no one can engage in speech on public sidewalks.
Such a rule completely eliminates free speech in a public forum, even though it
doesn't discriminate on the basis of viewpoint.
If CLS and all other student expressive groups have a right of expressive
association concerning their membership policies, Hastings violates that First
Amendment right by demanding that it be waived as a condition of access to a
limited public forum. Such an unconstitutional condition is also an
unreasonable restriction in light of the purpose of the forum (which is to
create a marketplace of ideas for student group expression).
Rick
Rick Duncan
Welpton Professor of Law
University of Nebraska College of Law
Lincoln, NE 68583-0902
"And against the constitution I have never raised a storm,It's the scoundrels
who've corrupted it that I want to reform" --Dick Gaughan (from the song,
Thomas Muir of Huntershill)
_______________________________________________
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.
