Coercion test limits

Malla Pollack mallapollack3 at gmail.com
Fri Apr 30 16:32:50 PDT 2010


Applying the same test for religious and political speech thows out the
Establishment Clause.
Malla

On Fri, Apr 30, 2010 at 5:32 PM, Rick Duncan <nebraskalawprof at yahoo.com>wrote:

> Prof Jamar asks: "Is a school-sponsored commencement speaker giving a
> Christian prayer coercive?  If the choice is not to attend or to be forced
> to listen to such a prayer, is that coercive?  Isn't it exactly cases like
> this that lead to a less accommodationist position, more separationist, and
> we end up with Lemon and endorsement?
>
>
>
> What about a commencement speaker who gives a message endorsing cap & tax
> legislation to combat global warming or same-sex marriage as necessary to
> achieve full social equality?
>
> The public schools do indeed create a captive audience for all
> school-sponsored speech, and much of this speech deeply offends members of
> the captive audience.
>
> Again, I would apply the same test to all captive speech cases, as opposed
> to one rule for religious speech and another rule for controversial secular
> messages.
>
> I would tend to allow commencement speakers to say what they want to say
> and allow counter-speech to provide any necessary balance.
>
>
> Rick Duncan
> Welpton Professor of Law
> University of Nebraska College of Law
> Lincoln, NE 68583-0902
>
>
> "And against the constitution I have never raised a storm,It's the
> scoundrels who've corrupted it that I want to reform" --Dick Gaughan (from
> the song, Thomas Muir of Huntershill)
>
>
> --- On *Fri, 4/30/10, Steven Jamar <stevenjamar at gmail.com>* wrote:
>
>
> From: Steven Jamar <stevenjamar at gmail.com>
> Subject: Coercion test limits
> To: "CONLAWPROFS professors" <Conlawprof at lists.ucla.edu>
> Date: Friday, April 30, 2010, 1:24 PM
>
> Rick,
>
> Is a school-sponsored commencement speaker giving a Christian prayer
> coercive?  If the choice is not to attend or to be forced to listen to such
> a prayer, is that coercive?  Isn't it exactly cases like this that lead to a
> less accommodationist position, more separationist, and we end up with Lemon
> and endorsement?
>
> Or is that OK with you because the person is not being forced to take
> communion or renounce his or her beliefs -- which is the only coercion you
> recognize?  What are the limits?
>
> Steve
>
>
> --
> Prof. Steven Jamar
> Howard University School of Law
> Associate Director, Institute of Intellectual Property and Social Justice
> (IIPSJ) Inc.
>
> -----Inline Attachment Follows-----
>
> _______________________________________________
> To post, send message to Conlawprof at lists.ucla.edu<http://mc/compose?to=Conlawprof@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.
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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.
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ucla.edu/pipermail/conlawprof/attachments/20100430/7dccc907/attachment.htm>


More information about the Conlawprof mailing list