Quid Pro Quo

[Michael McConnell]

ONe problem with Alan Brownstein's "quid pro quo" argument--strong
free ex protection coupled with a strong no funding principle--is
that the two principles would be contradictory at the core.  Consider
Sherbert v. Verner. The strong free ex principle would hold that she
is entitled to her unemployment benefits. The strong no-funding
principle would hold that unemployment comp may *not* be extended to
subsidize religiously-motivated unemployment. Similarly, consider
school aid. The no-funding principle says no funding, but a strong
free ex principle would forbid discrimination against an otherwise
eligible choice merely because it was religious. Alan's proposal
would recreate the old "tension between the clauses" with a
vengeance.
-- Michael McConnell (U of Utah)