Public university investigatingstudentsforsteppingonHamasandHezbollah flags that containedthe nameof Allah

[Scott Markowitz]

Doesn't the fact that the Court, in applying strict scrutiny, found 
pursuit of diversity in an educational setting a compelling interest 
tell us that pretty much anything goes (so long as it's sufficiently 
narrowly tailored) - speech restriction included?

Scott

Harry Pohlman wrote:
> The Court claimed it was applying strict scrutiny in GRUTTER.  It may 
> have applied it more deferentially than it should have, but it did not 
> say that a relaxed form of Equal Protection could be applied because 
> Michigan was engaged in a non-sovereign function, at least i don't 
> recall any such language.
>
> Harry
>
>
>
> On Feb 16, 2007, at 12:10 AM, Scott Markowitz wrote:
>
>> Harry Pohlman wrote:
>>>  assuming that there were no statutes prohibiting this result, could 
>>> a public university constitutionally exclude a certain ethnic group 
>>> for the same reason that you think would justify punishing speech -- 
>>> ie, "to mold a chosen educational environment?"  if not, why not?
>>
>> Couldn't one interpret the Michigan affirmative action cases as 
>> saying exactly this?
>>
>> Scott
>> _______________________________________________
>> To post, send message to Conlawprof at lists.ucla.edu
>> To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see 
>> http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/conlawprof
>>
>> 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.
>
>