Course Content

Steven Jamar stevenjamar at gmail.com
Wed Sep 7 08:44:43 PDT 2005


1.    Does anyone contend that as a general matter UC is not entitled  
to set prerequisites for admission, including required courses and  
other courses that are acceptable for HS credit and others that are not?

2.    Does anyone contend that UC cannot exclude certain courses  
taught in HS from inclusion as getting topical HS credit?  E.g., some  
colleges require three science courses, and do not include "general  
science" as an acceptable science course.  Can't UC do this?

I would expect that most would agree that UC can do 1 & 2 and has  
wide discretion in how to exercise its authority to do so.

3.    So long as it has reasons to do so which are not from a short  
list of improper reasons, those reasons would be sufficient.  Right?

4.    Does anyone contend that UC can exclude students of a certain  
religion simply because of their status as members or adherents of  
that religion?

5.    Isn't the legality of what is going on at UC really a very fact  
specific matter?  If so, then we cannot really condemn or condone UC  
based upon, of all things, a complaint or news reports of a lawsuit.

So making an assumption that the schools were teaching some suspect  
courses out of books which are not acceptable to UC on the grounds  
that they were teaching fiction as fact and faith as science, why  
cannot UC refuse to accept those courses for credit?

It seems the singling-out argument is pretty weak if the only schools  
teaching those courses out of those textbooks are the ones at issue.

I concede the possibility that UC might be acting illegally -- that  
there might be some person on a mission motivated by anti-something- 
or-other animus (it can't be anti-Christian since most students at UC  
are presumably in fact Christian and since many  students probably  
attended Christian schools of one type or another).

But assume the absence of a showing of wrong intent, and in the  
presence of a showing of a non-illegal reason, isn't this sort of  
activity legal?  That is, does it not turn on intent?

Steve


-- 
Prof. Steven D. Jamar                               vox:  202-806-8017
Howard University School of Law                     fax:  202-806-8567
2900 Van Ness Street NW
mailto:stevenjamar at gmail.comWashington, DC  20008   http:// 
www.law.howard.edu/faculty/pages/jamar/

"Politics hates a vacuum.  If it isn't filled with hope, someone will  
fill it with fear."

Naomi Klein




More information about the Religionlaw mailing list