Can they do that?
This sounds awfully fishy to me. Has anybody else heard of this? It seems to my (legally uneducated) social conscience that there ought to be something Constitutionally wrong here, but I can't put my finger on it...
Friday, December 30, 2005
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
A law that is discriminatory as applied though not on its face is still unconstitutional. If the law is struck down, I think that would be the rationale, paricularly if it's provable that the law was racially motivated. I believe there is also a requirement that a discriminatory law must advance some "compelling government interest." The Washington Post seems to be targeting that test by arguing that the law is unnecessary.
Of course, this is just my uneducated opinion sans research. I leave the legal analysis to my legally educated friends.
Post a Comment