19 January 2003

________________________________________________________________________________
My Web Site

Further info on the bill requiring clergy to report suspected child abuse as it came out of the Virginia Senate.

It does exempt the confessional. Which is a good thing since I no longer think that it is protected by the federal constitution. I thank Peter Sean Bradley of Lex Communis for reminding me of the actual standard. So I went back and waded thru City of Boerne v. Flores. The standard - at least as it applies to States - is that as long as the wording is nuetral a law is constitutional. Theoretically, it means that nuetral application of a law is required to make it constitutional but c'mon. How many legislators have not learned the lesson that you write your bill so that it is generic in terminology even if you intend to impact whatever "them" is out of favor at the moment? And of course, the federal supreme court has said that statistics are not dispositive in proving purposeful disproportional effect.

Having grown up in an area where my faith was by far the minority this standard worries me. What happens if my State passed a law making it "illegal for any person to possess on his person alcohol for any purpose prior to 1 p.m. on Sundays?"

No comments: