Reply #24: I should explain .. [View All]

[Maat]

Robert Tyler, the lawyer, has an office in the same city in which I live. I was amazed to find this out ... when I started to research the Religious Hardright (and the Alliance Defense Fund, a nonprofit legal organization which receives funding from favorite hardright millionaires). The main office of the Alliance Defense Fund is in Arizona, but one of the two satellite offices is in ..... (drum roll) ... in Murrieta, Ca., one of the few deep red areas in an otherwise blue state. There are a few hundred progressive activists in the area (at least), and we are a pretty tight group.

I'm buddies with some of the lawyers/retired-lawyers who are members of local A.U. (Americans United for the Separation of Church and State).

To me, the important thing here is the legal standard: compelling interest. There must be a compelling interest to interfere with the fundamental right of free speech, but the government may regulate the time, place and manner of free speech, if the aim is not viewpoint or content discrimination. Like the DUer above said, the government may regulate the free speech of students if it is disruptive (the actual words of the standard are basically delineated in the article). The thinking behind that is, basically, that keeping the schools free of major disruption is a very compelling thing.

Maat, J.D.