Recently in First Amendment Category

Barry, I believe the Supreme Court ultimately will conclude that the plaintiff did not have legal standing here - that this challenge was legally flawed from the very start. 

Merely being 'offended' does not give the plaintiff a legal green light to go to court to challenge this memorial. As you know, just because the 'standing' issue did not receive a lot of attention during oral argument does not mean the Justices are ignoring it.  They won't and in the end I believe our side will carry the day on this issue.

Second issue: the Establishment Clause question.  Does the placement of a cross on what was once public land - but now private land - constitute a violation of the Establishment Clause?  I believe the answer is 'no' and I am hopeful that's what a majority of the court will determine. 

Ok, Barry - looks like we won't agree on the Ten Commandments and what we consider to be the proper and constitutional displays present in Judge DeWeese's courtroom.

Let's try this one. 

A federal district court in New Hampshire has issued a decision upholding the voluntary recitation of the Pledge of Allegiance by students in school and has dismissed a lawsuit filed by the Freedom From Religion Foundation.

The suit was filed in 2007 against two New Hampshire public school districts and Congress on behalf of several parents and students who objected to the voluntary recitation of the Pledge of Allegiance in school.  Specifically, the lawsuit challenged the addition of the words "under God" in 1954 in the Pledge and the practice of reciting the Pledge in public schools as a patriotic exercise.

Barry, it looks like the White House got the message:  its email 'flagging' operation appears to have been disabled.

As I reported to you last week, the White House launched in early August what can only be described as a citizen reporting program.  The program was unveiled on the White House website by Macon Phillips, the White House Director of New Media.  As you recall, Phillips claimed that "[t]here is a lot of disinformation about health insurance reform out there" both on the web and floating around in chain emails.  Phillips stated that "[s]ince we can't keep track of all of them here at the White House, we're asking for your help. If you get an email or see something on the web about health insurance reform that seems fishy, send it to flag@whitehouse.gov."

Barry, I don't believe that school vouchers run afoul of the First Amendment, and neither does the Supreme Court.  In Zelman v. Simmons-Harris, a school voucher case, the Supreme Court explained that its Establishment Clause jurisprudence makes it clear that:

where a government aid program is neutral with respect to religion, and provides assistance directly to a broad class of citizens who, in turn, direct government aid to religious schools wholly as a result of their own genuine and independent private choice, the program is not readily subject to challenge under the Establishment Clause.

Even in the majority opinion in Locke v. Davey, which was joined by Justices Ginsburg, Stevens, Breyer, and Souter, the Court recognized that "[u]nder our Establishment Clause precedent, the link between government funds and religious training is broken by the independent and private choice of recipients."

Jay,

I think it's great that so many Americans want to volunteer for good causes, and I have no problem that many want to work with faith-based groups. Americans can volunteer for and/or donate to the charity of their choice; the government, however, cannot.

The First Amendment makes it clear that public funds should never go toward religious activities. Yet, certain people want to keep pushing programs that will do just that. One of those programs is happening right here in our backyard, and I would like to know how anyone can even justify it.  

The program I'm talking about is the "D.C. Opportunity Scholarship Program," which thanks to a few select senators, may be reauthorized, despite the fact that it is unconstitutional and completely unsuccessful.