Bowman v. U.S.

[ArtSpitzer at aol.com]

In a message dated 5/4/09 7:14:29 PM, nebraskalawprof at yahoo.com writes:

> no one seems to like the answer that a scholarship exclusion for students 
> majoring in gender studies from a feminist perspective does not even 
> trigger serious scrutiny under the Free Sp Cl.
> 

I'm not sure where I come out on this, but does your position mean that if 
Big State U. sets up a Department of Peace Studies it also has to set up a 
Department of War Studies?   If an alumnus donates money to create a chair 
for the study of democratic institutions, the university can't accept those 
funds unless it also finds funds for a chair for the study of totalitarian 
institutions?   If there's a scholarship for a student majoring in dispute 
resolution, there must also be a scholarship for a student majoring in dispute 
fomentation?    Why are these examples of private speech rather than of 
government subsidy for the speech (and only the speech) it wishes to promote?

Art Spitzer (employed by but not speaking for the ACLU)


**************
2009 3 
Free CREDIT SCORES: See Your 3 Credit Scores from All 3 Bureaus FREE! 
(http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/100126575x1221797372x1201397989/aol?redir=https:%2F
%2Fwww.freescore.com%2FOffers%2FStart%2FFreeCreditReportAndScore.aspx%3FID%3
D91831F371F138345B53A153F49D4D872%26siteid%3De927580bf7)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ucla.edu/pipermail/religionlaw/attachments/20090504/8cb1e97e/attachment.htm>