Can a Christian Club be Christian?

From the How Appealing blog:

"Kent school Bible club dispute becomes a federal case;

Court fight centers on 'Christians only' membership limit": Yesterday's edition of The Seattle Post-Intelligencer contained an article that begins, "It seemed a simple idea: two high school girls who wanted to start a Bible club at Kentridge High School. But the once-quiet grumbling over their Christians-only membership plan has now erupted into a full-scale federal case. On Thursday, a three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, meeting in Seattle, sat rapt as lawyers argued on the one hand for religious freedom and, on the other, against allowing discrimination in a public school district."
The Ninth Circuit has posted online the oral argument audio at this link (Windows Media format).Posted at 02:35 PM by Howard Bashman

If our schedule permits, we may listen to this oral argument in class--RFD

RFRA Case Decided

From How Appealing:

Today's U.S. Supreme Court Order List and opinions in argued cases:


1. In Gonzales v. O Centro Espirita Beneficiente Uniao Do Vegetal, No. 04-1084, Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr. delivered the opinion on behalf of a unanimous Court affirming the Tenth Circuit's ruling that the federal government failed to demonstrate, at the preliminary injunction stage, a compelling interest in barring respondent's sacramental use of the hallucinogenic tea known as hoasca. You can access the syllabus here; Chief Justice Roberts's opinion here; and the oral argument transcript here.

Maine Discriminatory Voucher Case

From the Religion Clause blog:

Cert. Filed In Maine School Voucher Case

A petition for certiorari has been filed in the U.S. Supreme Court seeking review of the Maine Supreme Court's decision in Anderson v. Town of Durham, according to today's New York Sun. The decision upheld a state school voucher program for students from small towns with no high schools. Towns may pay for those students to attend a non-sectarian public or a private school, but they may not pay for attendance at religious parochial schools. (See prior posting.)



And here is more from How Appealing:

The Institute for Justice yesterday issued a press release entitled "Parents Ask U.S. Supreme Court To End Religious Discrimination & Vindicate Full School Choice." A copy of the petition for certiorari filed yesterday can be viewed at this link, while the Main Supreme Judicial Court's ruling is available here.Posted at 08:58 AM by Howard Bashman

Guns (and Knives) Save Lives

This is not a Religion & the Constitution post.

From the Volokh Conspiracy (link):

Three Cheers for Mr. Cope:

The AP reports:

Two victims of a knife-wielding grocery store employee remained hospitalized Saturday after the man attacked eight co-workers and was finally stopped by a witness who pulled a gun, authorities said....

Elartrice Ingram, 21, was charged with nine counts of attempted first-degree murder, police said....

Ingram, chasing one victim into the store's parking lot, was subdued by Chris Cope, manager of a financial services office in the same small shopping center, Memphis Police Sgt. Vince Higgins said.

Cope said he grabbed a 9mm semiautomatic pistol from his pickup truck when he saw the attacker chasing the victim "like something in a serial killer movie."

"When he turned around and saw my pistol, he threw the knife away, put his hands up and got on the ground," Cope told The Associated Press. "He saw my gun and that was pretty much it." ...

While I'm at it, and since a tangential search came up with it, I might as well add this:

With Australian outback hero Crocodile Dundee as her inspiration, an 80-year-old British pensioner foiled a knife-wielding burglar with an even bigger blade of her own.

When woken by a masked man holding a knife, Winifred Whelan screamed and ran downstairs to the kitchen.

Grabbing a giant carving knife, she told the startled intruder "You call that a knife? This is a knife" in an echo of the famous scene in the Crocodile Dundee film when actor Paul Hogan confronted a New York mugger.

As she took on the intruder, her husband grappled with his accomplice.

Good work.

Summer 2006: Assignments

Casebook: William Cohen, The First Amendment (Foundation Press 2003)
Online Materials: Professor William Linder's Exploring Constitutional Law (Link)

I. Establishment Clause

1. Casebook p. 464-482; Linder Introduction (Link); Engel v. Vitale (Link); Handout 1

2. Casebook p. 482-487: Handout 2; Selman v. Cobb County School District (link); Prof. Linder's page on "The Evolution Controversy" (Link)

3. Casebook p.487-515; Handouts 3 and 4

4. Ten Commandments decisions (McConnell et al on line text--link)

5. Casebook p. 516-550

6. Casebook p. 550-560; Rosenberger Oral Argument

7. Newdow case (Link) ; Casebook p. 311-313

II. Free Exercise Clause

1. Babylon Five: Believers episode (in class viewing); Linder Introduction (Link)

2. Reynolds case (Link); Casebook p. 560-567; Goldman case (Link); Lyng case (Link)

3. Casebook p. 567-578; Handout 5; Handout 6 (Lukumi and Axson-Flynn)

4. Locke v. Davey (Handout 7)

5. Casebook p. 578-588; Cutter v. Wilkinson materials (Link)


III. Religion and Freedom of Expression: Public Forum Analysis, Public Schools, Subsidized Speech, and Expressive Association

1. Casebook p. 206-228

2. Casebook p. 228-244

3. Casebook p. 262-279: Poway case (Link) and (Link); Nat Hentoff, The Right Not to Read a Book with Whores in It (on Reserve in Library)

4. Casebook p. 279-298 (Re-read Locke v. Davey Handout 7)

5. Casebook p. 311-324; Christian Legal Society v. Washburn University (Link);Christian Legal Society v. Walker (Link)

"Religious Indoctrination" vs. "Secular Indoctrination"

Joe asks:

"Prof. Duncan: How would you define "secular indoctrination"? Is it indoctrination in the belief of atheism or indoctrination in the belief that religion and government are both best served by remaining separate? Perhaps this is where we differ. To me, secularism is not a faith or an anti-faith; it is, by definition, religious neutrality.Joe."

Well, if you look at recitation of the Pledge as a kind of indoctrination, you could view it as in part religious indoctrination ("under God" indoctrinates children with the idea that God exists and our Nation is subordinate to Him) and in part secular ideological indoctrination (the idea that America and its flag stand for one Nation, indivisible with liberty and justice for all).

More broadly, every day public schools take positions on controversial issues and seek to inculcate impressionable children in certain so-called common beliefs and values--patriotism, celebrate diversity and multiculturalism, gay pride and gay rights, break down traditional gender roles by encouraging girls to strive for important careers, environmentalism, etc. Now I embrace many of these secular beliefs, but that does not change the fact that public schools are using governmental power to indoctrinate impressionable children in controversial ideological assertions.

If it is improper and unconstitutional for the public schools to coerce religious beliefs on impressionable children, why isn't equally improper and unconstitutional for the public schools to coerce impressionable children into adopting controversial secular beliefs and ideas?

From a religious liberty perspective, a strictly secular public school curriculum is neutral toward religion only in the sense that it marginalizes all religious perspectives about what is true, what is good, and what is lovely. As Michael McConnell has put it so eloquently: "A secular education does not necessarily produce atheists, but it produces young adults who inevitably think of religion as extraneous to the real world of intellectual inquiry, if they think of religion at all."

I would love to hear your thoughts about whether a government school monopoly is consistent with freedom of thought, freedom of belief, and freedom of intellectual inquiry.

"One Nation Under God"

I would like everyone to post a comment discussing the following issue:

Given the Establishment Clause doctrine (Lemon test, endorsement test, etc.) we have discussed so far, how should the case be decided when a public school student and her parents challenge the constitutionality of the Pledge of Allegiance under the EC? Explain your reasoning.

C'mon give it a try. It's something to do while staying inside on a hot weekend.

Nebraska Marriage Amendment Upheld by 8th Circuit

From the How Appealing blog:



BREAKING NEWS -- Eighth Circuit reverses federal district court ruling that had declared in violation of the U.S. Constitution an amendment to Nebraska's Constitution barring same-sex marriage: You can access today's ruling of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit at this link.
The federal district court's ruling, which the Eighth Circuit reversed today, can be accessed at this link.Posted at 11:14 AM by Howard Bashman

This is not a "Religion and the Constitution" issue as such, but I thought some of you may have been following this case with interest. I have a kind of "parental" interest since I was one of the drafters of the Nebraska Marriage Amendment. So I am a very proud "founding father" today!