HAnsen v. Ann Arbor Public Schools 293 FSupp2d 780
mstern at ajcongress.org
Mon Apr 19 17:49:34 PDT 2004
The Establishment Clause violation in cases seems so blatant-and the ACLU
usually so vigilant about such violations-that it is noteworthy that it
reportedly saw nothing wrong with excluding other religious points of view
from the panel.This is especially so since in the Boston parade cases,if
memory serves,the ACLU did not support the right of parade organizers to
exclude marchers expressing a gay rights point of view.
I agree with your criticism of the language of the opinion.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Michael MASINTER" <masinter at nova.edu>
To: "Law & Religion issues for Law Academics" <religionlaw at lists.ucla.edu>
Sent: Monday, April 19, 2004 4:43 PM
Subject: Re: HAnsen v. Ann Arbor Public Schools 293 FSupp2d 780
> I wonder about the reference below to the ACLU. The ACLU did not
> represent any of the parties to this litigation; the sole reference to the
> ACLU is reported deposition testimony of one defendant in which he is said
> to have claimed that he had contacted the ACLU to determine whether the
> first amendment required a particular course of action. 293 F. Supp. 2d
> at 790 n.13.
> I also wonder about the care that goes into judicial writing (and perhaps
> reasoning) that describes panelists with religious beliefs that do not
> condemn homosexuality as:
> "six pro-homosexual adult clergy and religious leaders"
> 293 F. Supp. 2d at 791.
> Michael R. Masinter 3305 College Avenue
> Nova Southeastern University Fort Lauderdale, Fl. 33314
> Shepard Broad Law Center (954) 262-6151
> masinter at nova.edu Chair, ACLU of Florida Legal Panel
> On Mon, 19 Apr 2004, AJCONGRESS wrote:
> > I just stumbled across the above captioned case.The Ann Arbor School
> > District sponsored a diversity week.It delegated to the Gay Straight
> > Alliance(GSA) club the responsiblity of conducting a panel on sexual
> > orientation as part of the offical school program.GSA decided on a
> > which 6 ministers explained why homosexuality was not forbidden by the
> > Bible.The GSA refused a Catholic student's request to allow a minister
> > an opposing point of view to participate on this panel It decison ot
> > exclcude different points of view was upheld by school
> > authorities.Apparently the ACLU also supported the club's refusal.)
> > The trial court found both view point discrimination and an
> > religion in this arraingement.
> > I do not know if an appeal has been taken.
> > Marc Stern
> > _______________________________________________
> > To post, send message to Religionlaw at lists.ucla.edu
> > To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see
> To post, send message to Religionlaw at lists.ucla.edu
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see
More information about the Religionlaw