NJ Boy Scout Case
law4ever at JUNO.COM
Fri Mar 6 11:25:35 PST 1998
On Fri, 6 Mar 1998 08:25:40 -0400 "Vance R. Koven"
<vrkoven at WORLD.STD.COM> writes:
>Was there any indication in the opinion whether the Scounts had
>asserted a First/Fourteenth Amendment associational right?
Interesting question. I should think it most interesting if they did not
do so, since that is one of their prime arguments in the Randall/Mt.
Diablo cases here in California.
Question for Doug: Is the chilling aspect that the Scouts were
considered a public accomodation, or is it chilling that the court
implied churchs are public places subject to public accomodation law?
More information about the Religionlaw