County bans clothing with "disruptive or inflmmatory language or content" in County buildings
VOLOKH at law.ucla.edu
Mon Dec 1 18:16:49 PST 2008
I'm sympathetic with that view, but are we sure that the standard
vagueness doctrine applies to nonpublic fora?
From: Paul Finkelman [mailto:paul.finkelman at yahoo.com]
Sent: Monday, December 01, 2008 5:09 PM
To: conlawprof at lists.ucla.edu; Volokh, Eugene
Subject: Re: County bans clothing with "disruptive or
inflmmatory language or content" in County buildings
surely too vague to pass muster
President William McKinley Distinguished Professor of Law
Albany Law School
80 New Scotland Avenue
Albany, NY 12208
pfink at albanylaw.edu
--- On Mon, 12/1/08, Eugene Volokh <VOLOKH at law.ucla.edu> wrote:
From: Eugene Volokh <VOLOKH at law.ucla.edu>
Subject: County bans clothing with "disruptive or inflmmatory
language or content" in County buildings
To: conlawprof at lists.ucla.edu, paul.finkelman at yahoo.com
Date: Monday, December 1, 2008, 4:34 PM
Greene County, Missouri is banning "all individuals" from
"wearing clothing, apparel, or other accessories containing disruptive
or inflmmatory language or content" in County buildings.
Constitutionally permissible regulation in a nonpublic forum, or
unconstitutionally viewpoint-based or vague?
To post, send message to Conlawprof at lists.ucla.edu
To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see
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)
messages to others.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Conlawprof