JOHN LOFTON / Question, Please -- Jurors....

[Sanford Levinson]

I suppose the "technical legal question" could revolve around the
propriety of asking any potential juror who gives evidence of being
"deeply religious" (whatever exactly that means) if he/she is willing to
enforce laws (and put people in prison) even if he/she believes that the
law is not only unjust, but, more to the present point, "un-Godly, i.e.,
a violation of what the potential juror believes is the epistemically
knowable Divine command with regard to behavior?  Shameless
self-promotion:  I've recently written about our seeming incapacity to
have an intelligent public conversation about the relevance of religious
commitments to considering potential nominees to the federal judiciary,
see
http://www.stthomas.edu/law/programs/journal/Volume4num2/Levinson_Is_It_
Possi.pdf  I do not see why a strongly Catholic nominee who might fear
being denied communion for running afoul of the Church's basic tenets
should not asked if he/she is willing to enforce Casey in spite of
his/her apparent belief (perhaps based on public statements, as with
Judge Pryor) that abortion is indeed a violation of God's law?  And I
suppose I'd be interested, these days, in whether a candidate for
president (or VP) is a "Christian Zionist" who believes that we have
special duties to Israel because of its ostensible sacred status.
Perhaps we've already had a sufficient number of such discussions in the
past, but that is a quite different objection from the one that such
questions are "unhelpful" to persons who are part of the list.

 

sandy

 

________________________________

From: religionlaw-bounces at lists.ucla.edu
[mailto:religionlaw-bounces at lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of Volokh, Eugene
Sent: Thursday, April 24, 2008 3:39 PM
To: Law & Religion issues for Law Academics
Subject: RE: JOHN LOFTON / Question, Please -- Jurors....

 

    Folks:  Please let's focus on technical legal discussions of the
questions of the law of government and religion.  If someone wants to
tie these questions to Torcaso v. Watkins, or for that matter to other
legal principles, that's great.  But discussions at this level of
abstraction, with no tie to concrete legal matters, is not helpful on
the list.

 

    The list custodian

	 

	
________________________________


	From: religionlaw-bounces at lists.ucla.edu
[mailto:religionlaw-bounces at lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of JOHN LOFTON
	Sent: Thursday, April 24, 2008 1:37 PM
	To: religionlaw at lists.ucla.edu
	Subject: JOHN LOFTON / Question, Please -- Jurors....

	Are they to be judges only of "the facts" or also "the law"? And
if not "the law," sez who? What is a juror to do if he believes law is
unjust -- un-Godly, un-Constitutional?

	 

	John Lofton, Editor, TheAmericanView.com
	Recovering Republican
	
	"Accursed is that peace of which revolt from God is the bond,
and blessed are those contentions by which it is necessary to maintain
the kingdom of Christ." -- John Calvin.

	
________________________________


	Plan your next roadtrip with MapQuest.com
<http://www.mapquest.com/?ncid=mpqmap00030000000004> : America's #1
Mapping Site. 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.ucla.edu/pipermail/religionlaw/attachments/20080424/b291c297/attachment.htm