Donald Trump tells his base that his immigration policy is anti-Muslim, and more than 90% of the people affected by it are Muslim. The Solicitor General tells the Court that the ban is not anti-Muslim because most Muslims in the world do not fall within it. The question is whether the President gets to have it both ways.
Search
Recent Posts
- On moral philosophy—or ethics—and moral psychology (and the general irrelevance of scientific or academic psychology)
- Lock Him Up
- Philosophy & Psychoanalysis
- Transitional Justice bibliography
- This morning’s secular sermon
- The ubiquitous deception, illusion, concealment, and revelation of (‘provisional’) reality?
- Self-Deception and the Splitting of the Ego
- Psychoanalysis & Women (ii)
- A democratic, one-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict
- Psychoanalysis & Women (i)
StatCounter
« Hate Speech, Strossen, and Waldron: Matsuda to the Rescue | Main | Happy May Day! »
04/26/2018
The comments to this entry are closed.
About
- Religious Left Law brings together progressives from various faith traditions to discuss religion, law, politics, and/or culture.
Contributors
Links
- Ad Dominum
- AlterNet
- Americans United for Separation of Church and State
- Balkinization
- Buddhist Peace Fellowship
- Center for Law and Religion Forum
- Walter H. Capps Center for the Study of Ethics, Religion, and Public Life
- Center for the Study of Islam and Democracy
- Christian Century
- Corey Robin
- Daily Kos
- Dorf on Law
- dotCommonweal
- Episcopal Cafe
- Feminist Law Professors
- Hindu American Foundation
- Huffington Post
- Hullabaloo
- Immanent Frame
- Karamah: Muslim Women Lawyers for Human Rights
- Karuna
- National Catholic Reporter
- Network of Engaged Buddhists
- Nihil Obstat
- Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life
- Religion Clause
- Religion News Service
- Rewire.News
- Sojourners
- Talking Points Memo
Comments