Volokh replies to French: Should access to public university property and funding be treated differently from access to other public property and funding?Law Professor Eugene Volokh has written this response to ADF attorney David French: “This brings us to David’s last point: ‘What conceivable state interest exists in requiring open membership by expressive organizations?’ The answer, I think, is a variant of what President Kennedy set forth as a justification for Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964: the desire that ‘public funds, to which all taxpayers of all races contribute, not be spent in any fashion which … subsidizes … racial discrimination,’ or, adapting it here, the desire that public funds, to which taxpayers and students of all religions and sexual orientations contribute, not be spent in any fashion which subsidizes religious or sexual orientation discrimination.” Part IV: French: Responding to Professor Eugene Volokh (the sequel: CLS v. Martinez) |