http://headlines.agapepress.org/archive/12/112006e.asp
ACLJ's Argument: 'Separationists' Have No Standing in Notre Dame Case
By Jim Brown
December 11, 2006
(AgapePress) - A group that specializes in constitutional law is urging the
highest court in the U.S. to deny taxpayer standing in a church-state case.
The federal government had funded a teacher training program through a
grant to the University of Notre Dame. However, strict advocates of the
"separation of church and state" filed a lawsuit claiming the program
violated the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment.
The grant expired while the case was still pending in the trial court, and
the federal trial court threw the case out as moot. Yet the Court of
Appeals resurrected the case, allowing the plaintiffs to sue Notre Dame to
force the school to reimburse the government for the grant money. The
Catholic university then asked the Supreme Court to hear the case.
The American Center for Law & Justice (ACLJ) has filed a
friend-of-the-court brief on behalf of the school, asking the court to hold
that the same rules apply to church-state separationists as to everyone
else.
"Notre Dame has asked the Supreme Court to hear the case on the theory that
the third party, namely the separationists, has no standing to ask for
money to be paid from party C to Party D," says ACLJ's senior litigation
counsel Walter Weber. "They're not going to get any benefit," he continues.
"So we filed an amicus brief saying not only is that right, but that the
Supreme Court should use this case as an opportunity to revisit the whole
question of federal taxpayer standing."
Weber points out that, unfortunately, since the late 1960s there has been a
special exception for church-state cases. "Someone who is no more than a
federal taxpayer can march into court and say, 'I object to what President
Bush is doing, or I object to what Congress is doing' -- even though it
doesn't affect them anymore than it does any other taxpayer in the whole
country," says the attorney.
"So we pointed out that this is really an anomalous exception, that it runs
contrary to the direction of the law in every other area -- and it's
basically unfair," Weber adds. "Why should they get some sort of special
right to go in and complain as a taxpayer when no one else does?"
Weber believes the high court will take the case, noting that Chief Justice
John Roberts and other members of the court believe very strongly in the
separation of powers and see the courts as limited to cases and
controversies. The ACLJ says the court will likely decide within the next
two months whether to hear the case. If the court accepts University of
Notre Dame v. Laskowski, it could hear and decide the case by the end of
June 2007.
***************************************************************
You are invited to check out the following:
The Rise of the Theocratic States of America
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/theocracy.htm
American Theocrats - Past and Present
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/theocrats.htm
The Constitutional Principle: Separation of Church and State
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/index.html
[and to join the discussion group for the above site and/or Separation of
Church and State in general, listed below]
HRSepCnS · Hampton Roads [Virginia] SepChurch&State
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HRSepCnS/
[Its not just Hampton Roads folks who are members, there are members from
all over the US and a couple from overseas as well]
***************************************************************
.. . . You can't understand a phrase such as "Congress shall make no law
respecting an establishment of religion" by syllogistic reasoning. Words
take their meaning from social as well as textual contexts, which is why "a
page of history is worth a volume of logic." New York Trust Co. v. Eisner,
256 U.S. 345, 349, 41 S.Ct. 506, 507, 65 L.Ed. 963 (1921) (Holmes, J.).
Sherman v. Community Consol. Dist. 21, 980 F.2d 437, 445 (7th Cir. 1992)
.. . .
****************************************************************
USAF LT. COL (Ret) Buffman (Glen P. Goffin) wrote
"You pilot always into an unknown future;
facts are your only clue. Get the facts!"
That philosophy 'snipit' helped to get me, and my crew, through a good
many combat missions and far too many scary, inflight, emergencies.
It has also played a significant role in helping me to expose the
plethora of radical Christian propaganda and lies that we find at
almost every media turn.
*****************************************************************
THE CONSTITUTIONAL PRINCIPLE:
SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/index.html
****************************************************************
.
|
