Daily Archives: July 21, 2010

Christian Post: “Christians in this Himalayan nation who are still longing to openly practice their faith were disheartened this month when the government proposed the kind of ‘anti-conversion’ law that other nations have used as a pretext for falsely accusing Christians of ‘coercion.’ The amendment bill would punish ‘proselytizing’ that ‘uses coercion or other forms of inducement’ – vaguely enough worded, Christians fear, that vigilantes could use it to jail them for following the commands of Christ to feed, clothe and otherwise care for the poor.”

Haaretz: “Police say vandals have smashed or overturned 27 gravestones at a Jewish cemetery in eastern France. … Jewish grave sites around France are attacked sporadically by vandals, who leave gravestones broken or sprayed with anti-Semitic slogans. … During the last decade France has suffered a wave of violence against Jewish schools, synagogues and cemeteries that coincided with fighting in the Middle East. Many of the attacks have been blamed on young Muslims.”

Reuters: “A U.S. judge on Wednesday refused a request by environmental groups to reinstate the Obama administration’s original moratorium on deepwater drilling set in the wake of the BP Plc oil spill.”

Sify News: “City of Phoenix, fifth most populated city of USA, has appreciated acclaimed Hindu leader Rajan Zed’s invocation from ancient Sanskrit scriptures opening the City Council meeting on July seven, reportedly for the first time since it was incorporated in 1881.”

When the Exception Swallows the Rule – The Church Plan Exception to ERISA

“Although the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA), 29 U.S.C. § 1001 et seq., is very expansive in its preemption of state law, there are certain narrow exceptions to ERISA coverage, including an exception for church plans. For decades, employers affiliated with a church have chosen to structure their employee welfare benefit plans (such as life, health and disability plans) as ERISA plans, rather than church plans. There are a number of benefits to doing so, including federal court jurisdiction, consistency of interpretation for plans covering participants in multiple states, and a favorable standard of review, to name a few. However, participants of these plans are increasingly challenging benefit denials in state court, asserting that the plans in which they participate are church plans and not ERISA plans.”
By Amy L. Blaisdell
Greensfelder, Hemker & Gale, P.C., St. Louis, MO and Chicago, IL

Yahoo (AFP): “Laws criminalizing gay sex in many countries in the Asia-Pacific region is pushing infection rates of HIV and AIDS to ‘alarming’ levels, the United Nations Development Programme said Wednesday. … ‘These laws often taken on the force of vigilantism, frequently leading to abuse and human rights violations. Correspondingly, HIV prevalence has reached alarming levels among men who have sex with men and transgender populations in many countries of the region,’ the statement said.”

Legal Blog Watch: “A federal judge in Denver ruled last week that the ‘Stolen Valor Act,’ which prohibits people from falsely claiming they have been awarded military decorations and medals, is ‘facially unconstitutional.’ U.S. District Judge Robert E. Blackburn ruled on Friday of last week that the act violates free speech.”

First Amendment Center (AP): “A rural school district that canceled its prom rather than allow a lesbian student to attend with her girlfriend has agreed to pay $35,000 to settle a discrimination lawsuit the ACLU filed on her behalf.”

Associated Press: “A convicted sex offender can possess material depicting nudity upon his release from prison after the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld part of an appeal of his sentence.” | U.S. v. Simons, No. 09-2142 (8th Cir. July 21, 2010) | View opinion in Google Viewer

Associated Press: “Republican U.S. Rep. Shelley Moore Capito announced she would not enter the race a day after popular Gov. Joe Manchin launched his campaign to fill the remaining two-plus years of Byrd’s term. The filing deadline for candidates is Friday.”

OneNewsNow: “Two employees of the University of Texas at Arlington who prayed over a co-worker’s cubicle — and were subsequently fired — will have their day in court. Attorney Jeff Mateer of Liberty Institute tells OneNewsNow that after work hours, the plaintiffs prayed over the cubicle of an employee with whom they had had trouble. After losing their jobs, the workers brought suit under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, and the first phase of the case has ended in their favor.”

OneNewsNow: “From condoms for young children in Provincetown to sex education for kindergartners in Helena, Katie Reid — author of When the Bough Breaks — believes the intent of such actions is to provide children a means to engage in sexual relations with fewer possible side effects. But as Reid points out, there are more consequences to sex than just pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases.”

Padraic O’Hare, Professor of Religious and Theological Studies and Director of the Center for the Study of Jewish-Christian-Muslim Relations at Merrimack College, North Andover, MA, writing at The Washington Post / On Faith: “We need more mosques – as well as churches, synagogues and ashrams – at Ground Zero; in Bay Ridge in my beloved hometown of Brooklyn; on Staten Island, and all over!”

ChristianNewsWire: “In all 46 counties where the amendment was presented, it passed overwhelmingly by an amazing 75%! Georgia is the first state in the nation where voters have said ‘Yes’ to the Personhood question.”

Yahoo (Reuters): “The Catholic Church’s failure to derail a gay marriage law in Argentina shows once powerful clergymen losing their influence in Latin America, where pressure is growing for more liberal social legislation. … Extending gay rights and other social legislation being pushed through by the region’s politicians suggest Latin Americans are becoming more liberal in contrast with the Church’s unbending views on sexual freedom, contraceptives and abortion.”

Law.com: “Law school students faced one of the roughest hiring seasons ever this summer, as firms cut their summer classes by an average of 44 percent, according to our Summer Hiring Survey. The 114 firms that responded to the survey hired an average of 31 summer associates this year, down from last year’s average of 55 associates.”

AfterAbortion.org: “Despite media reports to the contrary, women are still able to file lawsuits for negligent screening and psychological injuries under a Nebraska law. In a preliminary ruling issued July 14, Federal District Judge Laurie Smith Camp ruled that neither the effective date of the bill nor the law itself could be enjoined, clearing the way for the law to go into effect July 15. Camp also rejected a motion brought by Nebraska’s Planned Parenthood affiliate to strike the legislature’s finding of fact that was included in the law, which states that ‘the existing standard of care for pre-abortion screening and counseling is not always adequate to protect the health needs of women.’”

New York Times: “President Obama signed into law on Wednesday a sweeping expansion of federal financial regulation, marking another — and perhaps last — major legislative victory before the midterm elections in November, which could recast the Congressional landscape.”

Catholic Herald: “A new UN Aids study has lent credibility to faith leaders who have long argued that behavioural change is key to combating the spread of the illness, a Catholic expert on the disease has said. … A study from the Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/Aids released last week showed that HIV prevalence among young people has declined by more than 25 per cent in 15 of the 21 most-affected countries. In eight countries, according to the report, the declines in HIV prevalence have resulted, at least in part, from positive changes in sexual behaviour among young people, including youth waiting longer before they become sexually active and having fewer partners.” | Report

Lee J. Strang, associate professor of law at the University of Toledo College of Law, writing at First Things / On The Square: In Church, State, and Original Intent, Donald Drakeman, a lecturer in Princeton University’s department of politics, shows that the strict-separationist interpretation was a house built on sand. … The no-national-church interpretation of the Clause, Drakeman argues, is the broadest interpretation the evidence will support. Beyond that core of determinate original meaning, there is insufficient linguistic consensus. For instance, as he argues, the term ‘establishment’ included legally established preferences for one sect or denomination, but we do not know what it may have meant beyond that. Hence, the Clause does not answer many of the questions that exercise church-state debates today. These are (or ought to be, under the Constitution) the domain of constitutional construction by the political branches.”

The Boston Globe: “Responding to a student’s fight to have the Pledge of Allegiance said at Arlington High School, a school board subcommittee has recommended the pledge be led every day so that it can be recited on a voluntary basis in all schools. … The new policy would require principals at every school to ensure that students have the opportunity to voluntarily say the pledge during the school day.”

“The Court of Appeals order reversed a lower court ruling last month that concluded the local ordinance was part of an appropriation package for maintaining state and local government and thus is not subject to a referendum.”

NJ.com: “With same-sex marriage legislation having failed in the state Senate, Gov. Chris Christie on record opposing it and a proposal to put the question to voters going nowhere fast, hundreds of supporters and opponents of gay marriage descended on Trenton Tuesday to prepare for the next expected front in the battle: the state Supreme Court.”

Physorg.com: “Researchers at the University of Sheffield have applied an evolutionary ‘use it or lose it’ principle when studying past marriage patterns, to show that marriage can influence the evolution of age-patterns of fertility. … Duncan Gillespie from the University of Sheffield’s Department of Animal and Plant Sciences, said: ‘In today’s society, family-building appears to be increasingly postponed to older ages, when relatively few women in our evolutionary past would have had the opportunity to reproduce. As a result, this could lead to future evolutionary improvements in old-age female fertility.’”

Americans United for Separation of Church and State: “Americans United for Separation of Church and State today asked the Internal Revenue Service to investigate Reclaiming Oklahoma for Christ, charging that the organization violated federal law by promoting a candidate’s campaign rally. Reclaiming Oklahoma for Christ operates as a tax-exempt group and solicits tax-deductible donations on its Web site, but last month it distributed an e-mail in support of Rep. Sally Kern, a candidate seeking reelection to the state House of Representatives.”

Christian Science Monitor: “In late May, the Senate Armed Services Committee approved an amendment that could create significant changes for pregnant servicewomen, especially those stationed overseas. Sen. Roland Burris (D) of Illinois added language to the 2011 National Defense Authorization Act that would allow US military health facilities to provide abortions for servicewomen. The full Senate will decide the fate of the amendment soon. Though well-intentioned, a policy to allow abortions at military bases and hospitals will almost certainly create a more hostile environment for pregnant servicewomen.”

Spiegel Online: “Many believe that those who hide their faces are rejecting Western values along with integration and participation in the society in which they live. And, worst of all, those who hide their faces reject Europe’s most precious birthright: Respect for the individual. … According to a survey by the Pew Research Center’s Global Attitudes Project, based in Washington, a clear majority of Germans, French, Spanish and British all support a ban. Most Americans however would reject such a ban. Yet do the majority of citizens have the inherent right to see the faces of their fellow citizens? Are people obliged to participate in society? Is a ban really necessary for security reasons — or do current bans on covering the face fulfill these requirements?”

Peter Gadiel writing at USA Today: “The proposed mosque near the site of the 9/11 mass murder is a continuation of Islam’s violent history, which promotes destroying prior cultures and building on the ruins.”

Associated Press: “Spain’s foreign minister predicted Wednesday that Cuba’s release of dozens of political prisoners could eventually lead to a thaw in U.S. relations and the lifting of a decades-old embargo against the Communist-run island.”

LifeSiteNews: “The embattled University of Victoria pro-life club, Youth Protecting Youth (YPY), is declaring victory after reaching a settlement last week with UVic’s student society (UVSS) that reinstates the club’s status and funding. … YPY filed a lawsuit with the BC Supreme Court in May, but UVSS opted to settle out of court. They agreed to restore YPY’s club status and funding and rescinded the offending changes within their constitution. They also gave YPY over $700 to make up for the funding that been denied for the last two years.”

Ben Shapiro writing at Big Journalism: “This week, we found out that the supposedly conservative government of David Cameron is upholding the ban. Savage’s lawyers initiated a review of the ban by sending a letter to new Home Secretary Theresa May. In it, they lay forth the full history of the case, a selective prosecution which is mind-blowing in its moral blindness and suicidal impulse to kowtow to radical Islam … Apparently, they wanted to ‘help provide a balance of types of exclusion cases.’ In other words, they didn’t just want to put radical Muslim terrorists on the list. … This was a purely political act. It had nothing to do with safety of the citizenry or with justice. Documents from the Home Office actually show that the primary researcher knew that Savage posed no threat to the UK.”

LifeSiteNews: “The native Texan told LifeSiteNews.com (LSN) that CARTS officials abruptly terminated him for declining to drive a woman to Planned Parenthood’s South Austin facility, after he discovered that the facility performed abortions. … Graning said that no protocol for orders to drive people to abortion clinics had ever been discussed. ‘I’m a Christian … I love the Lord and I’m not going to be a part of something like this,’ said Graning, a former pastor. He pointed out that the woman quickly received a ride from another bus.”

LifeSiteNews: “In Hawaii, new battle lines have been drawn in the Democratic primary for governor now that Honolulu Mayor Mufi Hannemann has announced that he would have vetoed the civil unions bill rejected by outgoing Republican governor Linda Lingle. Hannemann’s opponent, former U.S. Rep. Neil Abercrombie, says he supports legislation that would have established civil unions for homosexuals with all the rights and benefits accorded to civil marriage.”

Associated Press: “Massachusetts Chief Justice Margaret Marshall, who wrote the landmark ruling making the state the first to legalize gay marriage, said Wednesday she’s retiring to spend time with her husband, who has Parkinson’s disease.”

LifeSiteNews: “A total of 22,357 abortions were reported in Michigan in 2009. This is a 13.9% decrease since 2008 and a 54.4% decrease since 1987, which saw the greatest recorded number of abortions in Michigan. ‘We are extremely grateful for the continuing decrease in Michigan abortions despite the hard economic times we’ve faced in Michigan,’ said Right to Life of Michigan President Babara Listing.”

“In June, when an Egyptian delegate in the NGO Committee asked whether one of IGLHRC’s positions on ‘gay rights’ could threaten the rights to freedom of religion and freedom of expression, the U.S. delegate forestalled examination of the group by calling for an immediate vote to accredit it.”

LifeNews: “The national pro-life women’s group Susan B. Anthony List issued a round of endorsements today for pro-life candidates in Alabama, Arkansas, Minnesota, and Nevada. SBA List backed two women and two men who face opposition from pro-abortion women in their races for Congress.”

NCPA: “Despite strong opposition, the Australian government continues to support mandatory filtering of the Internet, seeking to establish a ‘Great Firewall of Australia.’ If filtering is implemented, all internet service providers (ISPs) would have to scan their Internet traffic in real time, blocking access to sites that appear on a government blacklist, says Chris Williams-Wynn, a recent honors graduate of the University of Melbourne.”

National Center for Policy Analysis: “News that China consumed more energy than the United States last year will be taken by many as another sign that a new epoch is upon us. Indeed, that’s how the International Energy Agency, source of the data, described its findings Monday. But the headline numbers only tell half the story. The underlying data say a lot about the challenges facing both economies, says the Wall Street Journal:

* China consumed half as much energy as the United States in 2000; last year, it burned through slightly more.

* Yet the energy mix for each country couldn’t be more different; coal accounts for 22 percent of U.S. energy consumption, but a full two-thirds of China’s, up from 57 percent in 2000.”

The Daily Caller: “The very existence of Fox News, meanwhile, sends Journolisters into paroxysms of rage. When Howell Raines charged that the network had a conservative bias, the members of Journolist discussed whether the federal government should shut the channel down. … Jonathan Zasloff, a law professor at UCLA, suggested that the federal government simply yank Fox off the air. ‘I hate to open this can of worms,’ he wrote, ‘but is there any reason why the FCC couldn’t simply pull their broadcasting permit once it expires?’” | The Washington Post’s Ezra Klein, founder of Journolist, responds here: “The Daily Caller’s story is wrong. “Journalists” did not suggest shutting Fox News down. A law professor wondered whether the FCC could do it. The journalists in the thread ignored or opposed the idea (which is of course proper; it’s absurd to think that the FCC would, or should, pull the plug on Fox), and then there was a long conversation over whether Fox was a news organization or an activist organization.”

Tulsa World: “U.S. Sen. Tom Coburn said Tuesday he voted against the Supreme Court nomination of Elena Kagan because of her position on what the Oklahoma Republican has defined as natural or God-given rights. ‘Without natural law, so-called “progressives” would take us back to the 17th century, when rights emanated from the state or the king rather than the creator,’ Coburn said in a written statement following a committee vote for confirmation.” | See Coburn’s article at National Review Online.

Des Moines Register: “Iowa Sen. Chuck Grassley voted against the nomination of Elena Kagan to the U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday, describing her testimony to the Senate Judiciary Committee as evasive. ‘Because she has no previous judicial experience, candid answers were essential for us to ascertain whether she has the appropriate judicial philosophy.’”

Sherry F. Colb writing at FindLaw: “One of [Oklahoma's new abortion] laws prevents a patient from suing her doctor for failing to reveal the presence of a fetal abnormality. The structure of this law is different in kind from that of other abortion restrictions, and it accordingly calls for a separate analysis. … Specifically, precluding liability for a doctor who fails to reveal a fetal anomaly to her patient is different from the above restrictions in two ways — one more significant than the other. …”

The Sacramento Bee: “Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger will nominate Tani Cantil-Sakauye, a Republican appellate court justice with a reputation as a moderate, to be chief justice of the California Supreme Court … Cantil-Sakauye, 50, of Sacramento is a former prosecutor and Sacramento Superior Court judge. She would replace Chief Justice Ronald George, who has announced he will retire Jan. 2.”

Washington Times: “[I]t wasn’t a total shocker that the 13-6 tally included a yes vote by a lone Republican – Sen. Lindsey Graham, who on occasion has reached across the partisan aisle to work with the majority. But what wasn’t expected was the South Carolina lawmaker’s unusually blunt explanation for his vote, saying he was obligated to support a ‘qualified’ Obama administration nominee because ‘the last election had consequences.’”

Associated Press: “The Wichita City Council says it will continue opening meetings with a prayer after taking heat for the tradition Tuesday night.” | From yesterday’s issue of the ADF Alliance Alert: Wichita Council debates prayer before meetings. The story has been updated and retitled, “Council: Prayer will continue before meetings.”

Providence Journal: “With a packed agenda — from contract negotiations to a request from the Rhode Island affiliate of the American Civil Liberties Union to take down a school prayer from the Cranston High School West auditorium — School Committee members huddled in the teachers’ lounge at Hope Highlands Elementary School as the public filed into the auditorium. … By the time the School Committee members emerged, 1 ½ hours later, they would say little more than that they could not reveal what was discussed behind closed doors and that the committee would take up the issue at its Aug. 16 meeting in the form of a resolution.” | Related: RI: ACLU wants school prayer banner removed

The Longmont Times-Call: “A three-judge panel of the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals on Monday upheld its own ruling that a federal jury had enough evidence to support its decision that the Boulder County commissioners violated a federal law in 2006 when they denied the church’s request to expand.” | Rocky Mountain Christian Church v. Board of County Commissioners of Boulder County, Colorado, No. 09-1188 (10th Cir., July 19, 2010) | See Religion Clause for more information.

The Jewish Week: “News this week that the American Jewish Congress has suspended activities due to financial problems is depressing, though not unexpected. The once-proud organization, founded in 1918, and long the voice of liberal Jewish activism, lost much of its distinctiveness in recent years. As its membership declined and staff was reduced, it played a diminished role in domestic affairs, though remained known for its expertise on church-state issues.” | See Religion Clause for more information.

Religion Clause: “In Does 1, 7, 8 and 9 v. Elmbrook Joint Common School District No. 21 [PDF], (E.D. Wis., July 19, 2010), a Wisconsin federal district court refused to permanently enjoin a Wisconsin school district from holding graduation ceremonies in a church. The court rejected the claim of unconstitutional coercion, saying: ‘plaintiffs unease and offense at having to attend graduation ceremonies at the Church and face religious symbols, while in no way minor, is not enough.’”

ChristianNewsWire: “In less than a week, the Congress gathered signatures from more than 170 pro-life and pro-family leaders in 21 countries. … Organizations whose leaders are represented include: … Alliance Defense Fund …”

The News-Gazette: “A letter from the University of Illinois says controversial Professor Kenneth Howell could be back in the classroom this fall, pending a review by a faculty senate committee. But Howell said that’s not what he’s been told. … The UI attorney told [ADF] that legal action is ‘unwarranted’ at this time, and that the UI respects Howell’s First Amendment rights. … ‘A university cannot censor professors’ speech – including classroom speech related to the topic of the class – merely because certain ideas “offend” an anonymous student,’ Alliance Defense Fund senior counsel [David French] said.”

Inside Higher Ed: “The Alliance Defense Fund, which is representing Kenneth Howell in the controversy over his teaching at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, has given the institution an ultimatum: either assure in writing that Howell will teach his regular courses in Roman Catholic studies in the fall, or he will sue.”

ADF Attorney Gregory S. Baylor writing at Speak Up Movement / University: “Last week, I had the great pleasure of attending a conference sponsored by the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education‘s Campus Freedom Network. Along with Greg Lukianoff (FIRE’s President), Adam Kissel (the Director of FIRE’s Individual Rights Defense Program), and Professor Daphne Patai (a member of FIRE’s board of directors), I participated in a panel discussion entitled, “The Philosophical and Practical Underpinnings of Academic Liberty.” … In my prepared remarks, I observed that utilitarian rationales are not the only ethical arguments for free speech — one can make ‘deontological’ claims as well. People are entitled to speak and people are entitled to receive information, whether or not the effects of the expression are desirable. These entitlements can be called ‘rights,’ and thinkers differ on where these rights come from. I believe that people are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights, including the right to liberty — which includes the right to free speech. To be sure, many today reject the claim that rights come from God, but this conception of rights animated the thinking of the Framers.”

ADF Attorney Heather Gebelin Hacker writing at Speak Up Movement / University: “Late Thursday, we received a letter from the University stating that they are ‘suspending’ the decision of his department chair pending review by the committee. While this is a nice step, this does not resolve the issue. It is meaningless for Professor Howell to retain his status as an adjunct professor without being able to teach any classes, and the committee’s review of the situation does not change the fact that Professor Howell was relieved of his previously scheduled teaching responsibilities because his instruction to students was deemed not to meet standards of ‘inclusivity.’ Save for that email, Professor Howell would still be teaching Introduction to Catholicism in the approaching semester. That is a violation of his constitutional rights, and we have indicated as much to the University in our response letter, sent today.”

WCIA 3: “‘At a university which is supposed to be a marketplace of ideas, where debate and discussion go forth, this is unthinkable, especially in a free society,’ said [Jordan Lorence] of the Alliance Defense Fund. … Some faculty question the ‘freeness’ of Howell’s lessons. He’s a professor who answers to both the University and the Catholic church. … Now that relationship has adminstrators taking a closer look at university policy. They want to know if it violates the separation of church and state or if it threatens academic integrity.”

AP: “The Oakland City Council voted 5-2 with one abstention late Tuesday in favor of a plan to license four production plants where marijuana would be grown, packaged and processed.”

AP: “Three Americans were expelled from Indonesia’s devoutly Islamic province of Aceh on Wednesday after locals accused them of trying to convert Muslims to Christianity, a local government spokesman said.”

Sen. Graham: “The question I have for the body: Are we living in an age of legislative activism where the words haven’t changed in the last 200 years, but certainly the voting patterns are?”

“‘The court is talking about gay people, not homosexuals, and about people who have a social identity rather than a class of people who engage in particular sex acts,’ Professor Goldberg said.”

Guardian: “All science teachers, whatever their specialism, have to deal with questions about God. We should be prepared.”

Edge Boston: “‘A university cannot censor professors’ speech –including classroom speech related to the topic of the class–merely because some students find that speech “offensive,”‘ the News-Gazette quoted ADF lawyer David French. ‘Professors have the freedom to challenge students and to educate them by exposing them to different views. The Alliance Defense Fund is working with Professor Howell because the defense of academic freedom is essential on the university campus.’”

Bluegrass Policy Blog: “This “Letter to the Community from Strive Partnership” pulls no punches about how the current contract between the teachers union and the Cincinnati Public School System (CPS) ‘continues many of the failed policies of the past.’”

The Cloakroom: “With his nomination of Elena Kagan to the Supreme Court, President Obama once again fulfilled his threat to nominate judges who would decide cases on the basis of emotions and personal politics rather than fidelity to the original meaning of the Constitution. Kagan has no judicial experience, less relevant legal experience than any nominee in memory, and an extreme background of political activism that raises serious doubts about her ability to put the law ahead of a political agenda . . . ”

Thinly Veiled: Institutional Messages in the Language of Secularism in Public Schools in France and the United States
R. Vance Eaton, 6 S.C. J. Int’l. L. & Bus. 299 (2010)

“This paper seeks to compare French and American legal treatment of the Muslim headscarf in public school. First, I describe France as trying to instill, or protect, preexisting, monolithic national values. Next, I discuss the ‘American’ approach to the veil in school, considering actual headscarf disputes and analogous cases. Finally, I consider the veiling in school debate in light of Muslim integration into Europe and America. I ultimately favor American constitutional guarantees as the best tools for approaching the veil debate. This allows for focus not on the protection of homogenous, monolithic values but rather on the potential to make public schools the locus of broad religious expression and cultural integration.”

Making Rules and Unmaking Choices: Federal Conscience Clauses, The Provider Conscience Regulation, and the War on Reproductive Freedom
Rachel White-Domain, 59 DePaul L. Rev. 1249 (2010)

“The purpose of this Comment is threefold: to map the legal and political contexts in which the PCR was promulgated, to propose a theoretical framework within which conscience clauses may be effectively analyzed, and to analyze the text and potential impact of the PCR and the extent to which it conflicts with existing federal laws and regulations. Underlying the discussion of these points is the normative assumption that the right of the patient to receive unbiased information and quality healthcare in accordance with her own needs and beliefs should take precedence over the personal beliefs of the provider who is acting in his professional capacity.”

The Establishment Clause in 2009: A Baseline for Measuring Change
Daniel R. Ray, J.D., 26 T.M. Cooley L. Rev. 493 (2009)

“Stated more succinctly, the Court may look much different four years from now than it looked four years ago. For this reason, now is a good time to take a snapshot of the Establishment Clause. That is the purpose of this Article. The hope is that this work will function as a baseline of sorts against which we can measure future shifts in the law. For the sake of ease, the Article is divided along Establishment Clause test lines. The three predominant tests-Lemon, endorsement, and coercion-are Parts III, IV, and V, respectively. Part VI looks at the role of history as an establishment yardstick. In Part VII, I make some educated guesses about where we might see the Establishment Clause move in the years to come. But this Article starts at the beginning, in Part II, with a review of the history of the Establishment Clause.”

Redefining the Legal Family: Protecting the Rights of Coparents and the Best Interests of Their Children
Marissa Wiley, 38 Hofstra L. Rev. 319 (2009)

“Part II of this Note begins by explaining the ways in which a gay or lesbian coparent can claim some degree of parental rights over his or her former partner’s biological child, who was planned for, conceived, and raised within the context of a committed same-sex relationship. The benefits and weaknesses of every method are examined in each section of this Part. Section A details second-parent adoption. Section B describes coparenting agreements. Section C discusses the judicial doctrines of de facto parenthood, in loco parentis, and equitable estoppel. Section D expounds the legislative solutions of same-sex marriage, alternatives to marriage, and third party statutes. Part III turns to the evolution of the rights of coparents in New York State, examining the past in Section A and detailing the transition to the present in Section B. Section B reviews New York State’s approach to each method of asserting parental rights. Part IV identifies changes that need to be made in the law of New York in order to suit the needs of the modern family. Part V concludes that each remedy must be available to same-sex coparents to protect the best interests of the children of same-sex couples.”

Defending Against a Charge of Obscenity in the Internet Age: How Google Searches Can Illuminate Miller’s “Contemporary Community Standards”
Shannon Creasy, 26 Ga. St. U. L. Rev. 1029 (2010)

“Whether Miller‘s contemporary community standards test should be completely abandoned has been the subject of much debate and falls outside the scope of this work. To date, most governmental attempts at Internet regulation have been aimed at protecting children from online pornography, which is another issue that falls outside the scope of this work. This Note will, however, explore the challenges the courts have encountered when applying the community standards test, the ways in which both parties have attempted to shed light on Miller’s requirements, and how courts can simplify this process by allowing Internet search engine data to be introduced as evidence of the community’s values. To that end, Part I traces the history of obscenity law in the United States up to the current Miller test. Part II examines the application of the Miller test, analyzing the challenges involved in defining the community and the difficulties defendants face when trying to prove the standard with various types of evidence. Finally, Part III argues in favor of more clearly identifying the relevant community and, under any definition of community, allowing Google searches (and other search engine data) to be admitted as evidence to establish the values of that community.”

An Attempt to Legislate Morality: Forced Ultrasounds as the Newest Tactic in Anti-Abortion Legislation
Sarah E. Weber, 45 Tulsa L. Rev. 359 (2009)

“The Oklahoma House of Representatives . . . has proposed and overwhelmingly passed House Bill 2780, which is nearly identical to the ultrasound requirement in Senate Bill 1878. This law should be deemed unconstitutional because it is an undue burden on a woman’s right to an abortion. Furthermore, it violates a competent pregnant woman’s right to refuse medical treatment, and this right outweighs the state’s interest in protecting the potential life of a fetus.”

Stopping for Death: Re-Framing Our Perspective on the End of Life
Ruth C. Stern and J. Herbie Difonzo, 20 U. Fla. J.L. & Pub. Pol’y 387 (2009)

“This Article argues neither for nor against physician aid in dying. Rather, it reflects upon our growing sensitivity to suffering, and how this increased knowledge alters expectations of the doctor-patient relationship. Further, learning more about the nature and impact of serious illness highlights some of the limitations of our current end of life laws and policies. The legal parameters for voluntarily ending our lives are confused and in conflict. Moreover, they have been debated and enacted amidst a cacophony of rights’ talk, discourse about the permissible extent of governmental authority and the range of constitutionally-commanded privacy. Indeed, the current clamor threatens to drown out more subtle yet insistent voices asking that, before we bestow a right, we thoroughly investigate the nature of the wrong. But an insufficient amount of scholarly literature has addressed the conditions at ground zero in the assisted suicide debate: the quality of life of those near death, as well as their expectations for care and how a reasonable society might fulfill them.”

Guardian: “A man has been sentenced to 18 months in prison after telling a woman that he was also Jewish.”

Peter Hegseth writes at the Wall Street Journal access via Google: “Her intellectually dishonest opposition to our armed forces during a time of war shows bad judgement. She doesn’t belong on the Supreme Court.”