Today’s Legal News Headlines 3/3/2010

on today’s legal headline news…

Toyota withheld documents

Security forces arrest curfew violators in Concepcion, Chile

Supreme Court allows Benoit lawsuit against Hustler Magazine

High Court ponders Chicago gun laws

4 arrested in online event ticket scheme

Duration : 0:2:7

Read more about Today’s Legal News Headlines 3/3/2010

Fox News: libraries can’t show anti-religious art

In this interview from Fox News some guy comes on and suggests that libraries don’t have the legal right to have anti-religious art in their exhibits.

Feel free to comment and criticize.

Correct me if I am wrong but I do not think that the man manages to string together a coherent legal argument. It came across as white noise to me. Am I missing something?

I think it would be absurd if anything religious or non-religious was prohibited from libraries. I do not have a problem with religious art being sold at libraries, government institution or not. Pictures of crosses, or art with other religious imagery, is in my opinion perfectly acceptable if it is being sold _as art_ in a library, and not being used to promote religion. The same is true of anti-religious art.

It becomes a problem only when the state is putting religion (or irreligion) where it doesn’t belong, like in schools, on the money, or in the pledge of allegiance. In that case, it is simply a promotion of religion by the government.

Here, we are not talking about the promotion or religion or irreligion. We are talking about art being sold at a library. It would be very strange indeed if libraries were prohibited from holding items that have any implications for religion (positive or negative). The reason libraries are allowed to carry religious books, like the bible, is because they are not being used to promote religion. They are being held as part of the libraries collection -this is an acceptable purpose for a library, government run or not. The same goes for sales of art. If it is not the promotion of religion (or irreligion) but is the sale or display of art, it is constitutionally acceptable.

Duration : 0:3:49

Read more about Fox News: libraries can’t show anti-religious art

Senate Debate: Supreme Court

Democrat Rep. Paul Hodes answers the question: A critical role of a senator is to vote on federal judicial nominations. As a self-described social progressive, how will you apply those values in considering judicial nominations, including those to the Supreme Court?

Republican Kelly Ayotte answers the question: Does the president get a blank check on Supreme Court nominations as long as the nominee is qualified, or is it the responsibility of a senator to apply your personal philosophy and the wishes of your constituents to such decisions?

Duration : 0:3:34

Read more about Senate Debate: Supreme Court