No Stimulus for You

It will come as no surprise that I am not a fan of the stimulus bill, but I am blogging today about a small aspect of it. Both the House and Senate versions authorize grants to state higher education agencies for “Higher Education Facilities,” but impose limits on sub-grants to colleges and universities for renovation and modernization of buildings. No grant may be used for “modernization, renovation, or repair of facilities— (i) used for sectarian instruction, religious worship, or a school or department of divinity; or (ii) in which a substantial portion of the functions of the facilities are subsumed in a religious mission . . . .”

I think this passes constitutional muster for two reasons.

Continue ReadingNo Stimulus for You

Episcopal Modesty or Overreaching? Or Both?

Since an article from Foxnews.com has been up on the law school website, my inner self defensiveness prompts me to point out again that I did not say that “Catholic politicians have been excommunicated in recent years for not supporting positions consistent with the church’s teachings.” I actually referred to three segregationist politicians in New Orleans in 1962, but did note that many bishops have become more aggressive in saying that pro-choice politicians should not take communion. (Me misquoted by Fox seems to prove, again, that God has a sense of humor.)

But, as important as that may be to me, the larger issue is more interesting. The National Catholic Reporter has put up a story on comments by Catholic University historian Leslie Woodcock Tentler who criticizes the recent emphasis of many Catholic bishops on abortion and contrasts it with earlier treatment of social welfare policies and artificial contraception. Dr. Tentler argues that bishops in the first half of the twentieth century “didn’t push a single-issue approach to politics” and “spoke a pragmatic rather than a religious or doctrinal language” that “consistently framed the debate in terms of values that nearly all Americans shared.”

Continue ReadingEpiscopal Modesty or Overreaching? Or Both?

Misinformation Comes in All Forums

I am close to being a first amendment absolutist. While some of the stuff that we see in the course of judicial elections tries my commitment, I am opposed to almost all regulation of campaign speech. As we face another Supreme Court election in Wisconsin, I fear my commitment may be tried again (although it is, at this point, unclear whether there will be much of a race).

I am a judicial election agnostic. I have often said that campaign speech in judicial election will often make me, as someone who studies and loves the law, cringe. But just when I am ready to dismiss the idea of elected judges, I think of the last confirmation battle over a Supreme Court or controversial lower court nominee and I am back on the fence.

Let me try to illustrate this in what may be seen as a provocative way.

Continue ReadingMisinformation Comes in All Forums