Let's spend the first 10 minutes discussing the "metaphysical forum" issue in Locke v. Davey. In FN 3, Rehnquist just dismisses this issue with a conclusory assertion ("the Promise Scholarship Program is not a forum for speech"). But he gives no reasoning.
So, think about the forum issue. Is this case more like Rosenberger, in which a pool of money is a forum for the3 facilitation of private speech, or is it more like a government cheese program in which the government subsidizes Swiss Cheese but not Cheddar Cheese?
Be prepared to argue both sides of this issue.
Hint: Suppose the Promise Scholarship Program allowed funds to be used to pursue any major except "gender studies from a feminist perspective?" Does this raise any Free Speech issues?
-
Monday August 28 : Handout on Moore v Harper (PDF has been emailed to you); Originalism vs. the "Living Constitution": Strau...
-
I. Tinker A student's right to speak (even on controversial subjects such as war) in the cafeteria, the playing field, or "on the...
-
"Studying the Constitution has some of the same intellectual delight as reading Aristotle: it opens the mind on a subject of fi...
No comments:
Post a Comment