The bishops have their own lawyers. They did not commission the law
professor's letter, and no one but the signers had any input into its content.
Marci, even you agree that this bill was plainly unconstitutional, so it did
not take a conspiracy of bishops to get me to say so.
If the real
@lists.ucla.edu religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu
Sent: Thu Mar 12 14:51:09 2009
Subject: Connecticut bill
The bishops have their own lawyers. They did not commission the law
professor's letter, and no one but the signers had any input into its content.
Marci, even you agree that this bill was plainly
Thanks, Doug.
Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry
-Original Message-
From: Douglas Laycock layco...@umich.edu
Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2009 14:51:09
To: religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu
Subject: Connecticut bill
___
To post, send message
: Marc Stern mst...@ajcongress.org
Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2009 15:34:16
To: religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu
Subject: Re: Connecticut bill
___
To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu
To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see
http
.. No offense at all
intended.
Marci
Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry
-Original Message-
From: Marc Stern mst...@ajcongress.org
Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2009 15:34:16
To: religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu
Subject: Re: Connecticut bill
Just for the sake of perspective on the proposed Connecticut legislation, I
would welcome any comments on Section 200 of the New York Religious
Corporations Law (codified in Article 10 applicable to Other Denominations -
including Jewish Congregations ) compared to sub- sections (e) and
I have plenty of comments on it, as an officer of one of the other
churches, after the court seemed to contrive a new hoop for us to jump
through every week; but they probably would not get past the moderator.
We're from the government, we're here to protect you.
(Ironically, our church
*
From: religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu
[mailto:religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of SAMUEL M. KRIEGER
Sent: Wednesday, March 11, 2009 1:11 PM
To: Law Religion issues for Law Academics
Subject: Re: Connecticut bill
Just for the sake of perspective on the proposed
, March 11, 2009 2:54 PM
To: Law Religion issues for Law Academics
Subject: RE: Connecticut bill
To the extent that the entire NY Religious Corporations Law is mandatory, as
opposed to merely default provisions that apply in the absence of contrary
rules in the organization's charter or bylaws, I
Earlier today we discussed a bill in Connecticut to impose Protestant forms of
church governance on the Catholic Church. The bill has been pulled and
tomorrow's hearing has been cancelled, apparently due to a flood of calls to
legislators. Church leaders in Connecticut are not convinced
Well done, Doug et al.
While the signers of the letter disagree on a topic or two in the area
of religious freedom and constitutional interpretation of the religion
clauses, there is a huge breadth of space over which they and I
suspect nearly all constitutional law experts agree. This is
The fun is in the matters that are close to the line.
Whenever the law draws a line, there will be cases very near each
other on opposite sides. The precise course of the line may be
uncertain, but no one can come near it without knowing that he does
so…. Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr. U.S. v.
you are welcome -- and thanks for the current best info on the origin of the
phrase.
steve
On Tue, Mar 10, 2009 at 8:25 PM, Douglas Laycock layco...@umich.edu wrote:
Thanks, Steve.
I was one of those people who once attributed eternal vigilance is the
price of liberty to Jefferson. In
13 matches
Mail list logo
