> If you insist on a legal
justification, the right of the organizers to do this is guaranteed by
the 'free association' clause in the Bill of Rights.I am surprised to hear that this is all news to you.
What clause is that, Lou? The 1A reads: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances. Do you mean the peaceable assembly clause, or the petition for redress of grievances clause? The 1A, like the all constitutional rights except for the 13A, is a restraint on state action. It does not give you any rights against private actors unless they are acting in concert with the state. If there is a legal basis for the Colaition's right to pick its speaker's list, it is the no abridgment clause, though that only bars state action abridging protected speech because of its content. Since state action is not involved here, the 1A is irrelevant. There is no doubt that the Coalition is entitled, legally, to invite or decline to invite anyone whom it likes. The issue with regard to Lener is not whether there is a violation of a legal right, but whether disinviting an important member of the progressive Jewish community from a major ralley opposing the war in the mideast was smart or prudent. I think it is pretty clear that it was not. Look at how we are wasting time discussing this when we could be opposing the war. If you have any influence with the WWP and through that with ANSWER, maybe you could use it to point this out to them. jks
--------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Shopping - Send Flowers for Valentine's Day -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <../attachments/20030212/82bafcfa/attachment.htm>