RE: Federal Appeals Court Goes With 'God'

Capable of repetition yet evading review? But is it? Dan Conkle Daniel O. Conkle Robert H. McKinney Professor of Law Indiana University Maurer School of Law Bloomington, Indiana 47405 (812) 855-4331 fax (812) 855-0555 e-mail con...@indiana.edu ***

RE: Federal Appeals Court Goes With 'God'

yes but there is no guarantee that future inaugurations will be the same as past ones. Marc Stern From: religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu [mailto:religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of Friedman, Howard M. Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2009 3:03 PM To: La

RE: Federal Appeals Court Goes With 'God'

The original complaint asked for a declaratory judgment that adding "so help me God" to the oath, and having clergy as part of the inaugural ceremony are unconstitutional. That would presumably apply to future inaugurations as well. Here is a link to the original complaint: http://www.humanist

Re: Federal Appeals Court Goes With 'God'

Does anyone know why his case is not moot? Quoting Joel Sogol : >  Federal Appeals > Court Goes With 'God' > The National Law Journal > > Before every oral argument in the D.C. Circuit, a court clerk tells everyone > to draw near and give

Federal Appeals Court Goes With 'God'

Federal Appeals Court Goes With 'God' The National Law Journal Before every oral argument in the D.C. Circuit, a court clerk tells everyone to draw near and give their attention because the court is now sitting. The opening cry ends with