I appreciate Eugene’s referenced to Abood, which indeed is a trouble case. Can it legitimately be restricted to its facts—i.e., the extraction of funds to pay for what everyone would recognize as taking “political” positions. Would the Court have come out the same way if the funds were used, say, to provide for old-age homes for retired unionists? I’m asking this as a genuine question, since it’s been years since I taught that set of cases.
sandy
_______________________________________________ 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.
