NYT: Giving the Law a Religious Perspective

New York Times article focusing on the rise of a handful of religiously oriented law schools--Liberty, Regent, Ave Maria, and University of St. Thomas--as well as the idea of teaching law in a more religiously oriented manner generally. Raises some interesting questions:

• Can something that is "contrary to the law of nature" be law?
  
• Are religious perspectives welcomed at mainstream law schools, generally? Are they welcomed here at Cornell?
  
• Even if they are welcomed, should there be a more affirmative effort to expose law students to "seriously developed contrary points of view that proceed from a strong faith-based perspective"?
  
• Is CivPro mainstay decision Erie best characterised as a ruling that federal courts may not apply general principles in some cases but must follow state laws, and thus a denial of the possibility of "a law that's fixed, that's uniform, that applies to everybody, everyplace, for all time"?
  

• Finally, what do you think of a law school, like Liberty, that is not yet ABA-approved? Should a diploma from such a school preclude a student from standing for the bar?
  

Values Voters

A post-election Zogby poll (with a tiny margin of error of only about 1%) shows that:

42 percent of voters cited the war in Iraq as the "moral issue" that most influenced their choice of candidates
13 percent cited abortion
9 percent cited same-sex marriage.

Asked to name the greatest threat to marriage,

31 percent said "infidelity,"
25 percent cited "rising financial burdens"
22 percent named same-sex marriage.

From Washington Post

Election Protection

On election day, 44 Cornellians headed down to Pittsburgh to help ensure people could vote, in conjunction with the non-partisan Election Protection project. There was a really high turn-out, and people came back with a lot of stories. I personally met several people who were really glad that somebody was working hard to help them vote and make sure their votes counted.