The following podcasts come from a four-part symposium held on October 15, 2010 at the John Marshall Law School. Several professors met to discuss their articles featured in the Northwestern University Law Review Colloquy on the recent Supreme Court first amendment case, Salazar v. Buono. All of these podcasts can be accessed below, or downloaded via iTunes or Windows Media by clicking here. [link not available]
In the first podcast, Professor Lisa Shaw Roy explains why the Salazar case did not reach the truly interesting issue of whether the cross violated the Establishment Clause, but instead settled on procedural grounds. To read Professor Roy’s original Colloquy article, click here.
In the second podcast, Professor Mary Jean Dolan analyzes the new “reasonable observer” portion of the (arguably) expanded endorsement test. To read Professor Dolan’s original Colloquy article, click here.
In the third podcast, Professor Ian Bartrum discusses how the victory for religious groups may not really be a victory, since the endorsement test now looks to the secularization of religious symbols. To read Professor Bartrum’s original Colloquy article, click here.
In the final podcast, Professor Christopher Lund discusses how the government is forced in cases such as this to define religious symbols (like the cross), and thus threaten to expropriate the meaning of these symbols. To read Professor Lund’s original Colloquy article, click here.