The ACLU of Michigan put out the following press release on April 30:
Press Statement Regarding "Call to Prayer" in Hamtramck
Kary Moss, Executive Director
April 30, 2004
In the past week, the ACLU of Michigan has received hundreds of call and emails from around the country from people asking
In a message dated 5/27/04 11:14:24 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Just got this from the listserv, and thought you'd want to know that's where it went. :-)
My apologies. I have no idea how I hit "reply" and sent a message to this list!
Art Spitzer
In a message dated 6/4/04 7:57:29 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
(except, perhaps, in Louisiana) (since the treaty making final the purchase of the territory guarantees to the residents of the territory all the rights they enjoyed prior to the conveyance).
Jim-
You would have to say "except,
In a message dated 3/1/05 9:15:28 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Hey, I'm simply trying to prompt worthwhile conversation -- please feel free
to answer whichever questions you think are most interesting!
Four Justices will find both displays unconstitutional; Four Justices will find both
In a message dated 6/24/05 10:03:49 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I'd also point out that (1) San Jose Christian College did not take a side in the current circuit split over the substantial burden analysis ...
Is there an accessable source that summarizes the current state of the circuit
Sorry, that was not supposed to go to the whole list.
___
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
In a message dated 8/2/05 1:34:43 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
In a message dated 8/2/2005 12:07:44 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
yet it's trumpeted as proof of the bible's accuracy in the very curriculum that the ACLU endorses.
Art, are you there? Has the ACLU
The following useful perspective on ID comes from http://www.venganza.org/index.htm , which also contains related materials. If I properly understood Jim Henderson's posts yesterday, I believe the ACLJ would support FSM on the same grounds that it supports ID.
Art Spitzer
Washington, DC
(I hope
In a message dated 8/3/05 2:58:48 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
As an Italian, however, I am offended by the use of spaghetti. Perhaps in order to more diverse you can change it to taco or matzah in future postings.
If it were my own letter I'd be happy to do that, and also to substitute
In a message dated 8/29/05 11:36:06 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Ed; I am simply not going to respond any further to your lay person's analysis of the law
Mr. Brayton obviously doesn't need my help to defend himself, but as an experienced constitutional litigator let me say that I find
In a message dated 8/29/05 4:52:39 PM, Jim Henderson writes:
Art finds "standardless, unbridled discretion" discussions to have little to do with the real world ...
No, that's not what I was trying to say. I think many First Amendment cases can still be won -- some by me, I hope -- because
In a message dated 9/1/05 1:48:47 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Well, I know now what I always suspected. If I cried out to Jim Henderson for succor, he might well help me but one part of his mind would be thinking or at least considering if he could use my suffering to advance his agenda.
Perhaps the real explanation for the district judge's statement about being bound is that he wanted to do the right thing, but needed to place the blame elsewhere. Even life tenure doesn't solve all problems.
Art Spitzer
___
To post, send message to
Brad assumes that when I said the judge "wanted to do the right thing," I meant the politically right thing or the the right thing by his personal lights. That's not at all what I meant, and I would agree with him that a judge is not supposed to follow such a course.
What I meant was that the
Hunter R. Rawlings III, the former President of Cornell University who was recently called back to be its Interim President, devoted most of the annual "State of the University Address" today to the intelligent design controversy.
I think the following excerpts capture his central message:
I
Yes, of course there's a difference between building a cathedral and building a nativity scene. My point was that Rick Duncan's reasoning ("If the state can celebrate gay pride week, and Cinco de Mayo, and Earth Day, and pork producers day on the public square, then why can't it also celebrate
In a message dated 12/13/05 2:42:31 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
St. Paul, in Romans 1:18ff, makes it clear that ALL men know there is a God; some worship Him, others don’t and hold down this truth (that there is a God) in unrighteousness. Thus, strictly speaking, there is no such thing as an
In a message dated 5/23/06 11:34:43 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
public schools are not the place and when in public school is not the time to engage in religious worship. Why is that so hard to understand?
That really is the nub, isn't it? But my impression is that there are many millions
In a message dated 8/11/06 4:32:57 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
In the second appeal, the National School Boards Association and the Maryland Association of Boards of Education filed an amicus brief supporting the school district.
The ACLU was not aware of the second appeal until the decision
In a message dated 3/5/07 3:38:06 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I'm confused by this ruling.
The Supreme Court's order only instructs the court of appeals to dismiss the
appeal as moot. (Emphasis added.)The appeal was apparently only from the
district court’s denial of
Clearing up my own confusion, I see that Prof. Friedman's blog links to the
January 24 decision of the district court, which explains: This Court notes
that it previously dismissed plaintiff Tyler Chase Harper’s damages claims
against all defendants in their official capacities on Eleventh
How about hiring chaplains for the armed forces?
In a message dated 7/22/07 5:34:54 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The tough question is to come up with a concrete example of where some
compelling interest would indeed be in play. Rick, what examples did you
have in mind?
It seems to me that if a state says, we'll give grants to any social service
agency that operates a 24/7 pregnancy prevention hotline, and denomination X
says we'd like a grant, but our faith forbids us from operating anything on
the sabbath, and the state says too bad, then, that's not what
Chaplain Klingenschmitt was well advised to put a question mark in his
subject line. Last week's CA5 decision does not uphold the constitutionality
of the
school board's practice. Rather, the case (DOE v. TANGIPAHOA PARISH SCHOOL
BOARD, No. 05-30294 (July 25)) was dismissed because the
I'd be curious to know whether folks think there were any legal wrongs
committed in the following story, which comes to me as true, and whether folks
have
ideas about what Dad can or should do:
A 16 year old boy, one of 12 children in an Amish family, got into an
argument with his father
Marci-
I was trying not to assume. Except for the part about bringing the boy back
to tell his siblings about life on the outside, which seems gratuitously
subversive of the Amish family, I'm agnostic and eager to hear what people
think.
(Eugene's comments are, as always, very helpful.)
In a message dated 7/1/08 7:51:56 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Art-- Well, I don't think the story as told was truly agnostic. The views
of the boy were not included. ...
I'll plead guilty to that; the story came from the father. But religious or
secular, the views of teenagers do
I'm not even sure the necessary change would require an Act of Congress.
Someone can correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think a statute's codification
in the US Code is generally a part of the bill enacted by Congress. If you
look at the Statutes at Large, you'll see the future codification
Yes, I think what Prof. Laycock says is also true. And it's probably true
that if congressional action were needed, a change from 666 to 665a could be
included in a long list of technical corrections attached to some omnibus bill,
and no Member would even notice it. But I'm not sure a court
Marty Lederman writes:
I would respectfully dissent from [the] suggestion that ... gays and
lesbians really suffer much harm by being denied services or jobs or housing
on the
basis of their sexual orientation because they could get such services --
often at a higher quality -- just fine
In a message dated 8/6/08 9:11:28 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I would assume that rfra does not undermine neutral, generally applicable
felonies.
Didn't it do precisely that in the O Centro case?
**
Looking for a
car that's sporty, fun and fits in your budget? Read reviews
In a message dated 8/6/08 9:44:58 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I do not believe there is a precedent that is analogous involving underage
sex and/or polygamy.
I assume there's not a case on point, but what does that matter when there's
a statute on point?
**
Looking for
Write under law, then drip a drop of chocolate ice cream on that spot so it
smudges and can't be read.
**
It's only a deal if it's where you
want to go. Find your travel deal here.
(http://information.travel.aol.com/deals?ncid=aoltrv000547)
I didn't find Eric's post all that persuasive. I assume it's true that
police officers and firefighters are more likely than the general population to
encounter upsetting situations, but when the emergency ends they are in their
home communities and free to seek spiritual help from their
In a message dated 11/19/08 2:38:57 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
... This is not a problem if both parties agree, after the dispute has
arisen, to go to the religious court, and if both parties abide by the
judgment.
That is just a mechanism for voluntary dispute resolution; the
In a message dated 3/31/09 6:02:12 PM, layco...@umich.edu writes:
Here's one more way to think about it: ... the rule that government must
be religiously neutral [is] a special protection for religion
Government
can not try either to coerce you or persuade you to change your views
In a message dated 5/4/09 7:14:29 PM, nebraskalawp...@yahoo.com writes:
no one seems to like the answer that a scholarship exclusion for students
majoring in gender studies from a feminist perspective does not even
trigger serious scrutiny under the Free Sp Cl.
I'm not sure where I come
Thanks for the compliment, Rick.
I can see how funding a Department of X, or a Chair of X Studies, could be
characterized as funding the speech of one or more professors about X. But
it's hard for me to see how funding a scholarship for students who study X
amounts to funding the student's
When would a law that's not neutral or not generally applicable not also be
intentionally discriminatory? Can a legislature negligently or
unknowingly enact a law that's not neutral or not generally applicable?
Art Spitzer
**
Dinner Made Easy Newsletter - Simple Meal Ideas
for
On a more practical note, does anyone know who represented the parties in
this Texas case, and whether one of them (or ideally, both together) might
petition the court to replace these problematic seven words with an innocuous
comparison that makes the same point, e.g., Just as a student who is
In a message dated 6/21/09 10:12:48 PM, hamilto...@aol.com writes:
I'm still waiting for concrete examples of very real threats to religious
freedom without rfras. All examples welcome.
Marci-
I don't know whether you consider forcing a person to choose between
shaving his
I don't think I understand the question, perhaps because I'm not familiar
with the CLUB case. A violation of RFRA doesn't depend on any
discrimination; it's enough that the government declines to accommodate a
religious
exercise, that its failure to do so imposes a substantial burden on the
Marci-
I must be slow today.
1. Why does what I said explain the district court's frustration with what
it was being asked to do? If you're suggesting that the judge was pissed
at my clients (or at their lawyer) for having somehow caused the Fire
Department to make lots of other firefighters
Chris Lund writes:
One question. If the Department eliminated the medical exception to make
the law generally applicable and thus defeat the Free Exercise claim -
then doesn't it then run afoul of the neutrality requirement? I mean, in such
a case, the change was made because of and not
I'm certainly with you on tush-patting and branch-whipping. And on not
taking an 11-year old who stops walking, speaking and eating to the hospital.
I suspect (almost?) everyone on the list is. It's in-between that raises
issues. I have no doubt that child abuse has a very high cost to
In addition to what Doug Laycock said, the statute would also be
unconstitutional here because it presumes guilt and puts the burden on the
accused to
prove his or her innocence. Here, the government always has the burden of
proving, beyond a reasonable doubt, the facts that show a crime has
[I sent this last night but it doesn't seem to have reached the list so I'm
trying again, slightly edited.]
The courts have told us that a statute that coincides with a religious
belief, and that may have been enacted by legislators whose votes were
influenced by their personal religious
In a message dated 12/17/09 3:41:12 PM, vol...@law.ucla.edu writes:
here Elaine Huguenin stressed that her objection was to the content of
the ceremony that she is being compelled to photograph, and not just to the
identity of the payer.
In my experience, most people (including most
Let's just add it to the Pledge of Allegiance. Then we'll know how to deal
with it.
One Nation, where premarital sex is OK under God, indivisible, with
liberty and justice for all.
:-)
Art Spitzer
In a message dated 2/23/10 7:25:29 PM, mst...@ajcongress.org writes:
Here is a link to a fight
Apparently the Scientologists tried twice; two reported cases seem to fit
Marc's description:
Hart v. Cult Awareness Network, 13 Cal.App.4th 777, 16 Cal.Rptr.2d 705
(Cal.App. 2 Dist. 1993)
Clegg v. Cult Awareness Network, 18 F.3d 752 (9th Cir. 1994)
The cases didn't arise on a college campus.
Ira Lupu writes:
In a law school, there is certainly a rational basis for coming down on
the side of non-exclusivity as a condition of access to the forum and its
privileges -- among other things, all-comers increases the likelihood of
dynamic exchange of views, something a law school may
In a message dated 5/10/10 6:01:48 PM, aebrownst...@ucdavis.edu writes:
why wouldn’t those associational freedom rights also extend to deciding
to who may attend meetings and participate in discussions?
I think the associational claim might well extend to those activities.
But mightn't
In a message dated 7/29/10 10:40:22 AM, hamilto...@aol.com writes:
... a psychological counselor cannot be a competent counselor if they
reject the science of medicine on homosexuality, which appears to be what is
happening here.
Until 1973, the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of
Sandy,
I agree. I should have made my point more clearly, which is that many
people (like the poster to whom I was responding) seem ready to abandon freedom
of speech, and other civil liberties, at the thought of even one death,
while even thousands of deaths don't cause them to consider
But isn't the question under the state RFRA what the individual plaintiff
sincerely believes, not what sharia (or the talmud, or the Bible, or the
Pope) says?
Art Spitzer
In a message dated 11/10/10 3:55:31 PM, ste...@ajc.org writes:
Oklahoma has enacted a state RFRA. The new constitutional
This news report:
http://www.news9.com/Global/story.asp?S=13581680
says a state judge today issued a preliminary injunction prohibiting the
state from certifying the results of the no Sharia law ballot measure. The
report has a link to the decision. I understand the ACLU represented the
Sorry, now that I've clicked through on the link I see it was a federal
court, not a state court. Sorry.
In a message dated 11/29/10 2:58:20 PM, artspit...@aol.com writes:
This news report:
http://www.news9.com/Global/story.asp?S=13581680
says a state judge today issued a preliminary
Question: How many Danes does it take to change a lightbulb?
Answer: I can't answer that question; it would be a crime.
[Name withheld to prevent extradition]
___
To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu
To subscribe, unsubscribe, change
58 matches
Mail list logo
