Enter your mobile number below and we'll send you a link to download the free Kindle App. Then you can start reading Kindle books on your smartphone, tablet, or computer - no Kindle device required.
Getting the download link through email is temporarily not available. Please check back later.

  • Apple
  • Android
  • Windows Phone
  • Android

To get the free app, enter your mobile phone number.

A Right to Discriminate?: How the Case of Boy Scouts of America v. James Dale Warped the Law of Free Association

3.0 out of 5 stars 1 customer review
ISBN-13: 978-0300121278
ISBN-10: 030012127X
Why is ISBN important?
ISBN
This bar-code number lets you verify that you're getting exactly the right version or edition of a book. The 13-digit and 10-digit formats both work.
Scan an ISBN with your phone
Use the Amazon App to scan ISBNs and compare prices.
Have one to sell? Sell on Amazon
Buy used On clicking this link, a new layer will be open
$5.98 On clicking this link, a new layer will be open
Buy new On clicking this link, a new layer will be open
$38.00 On clicking this link, a new layer will be open
More Buying Choices
35 New from $5.95 51 Used from $1.98
Free Two-Day Shipping for College Students with Prime Student Free%20Two-Day%20Shipping%20for%20College%20Students%20with%20Amazon%20Student


The Amazon Book Review
The Amazon Book Review
Author interviews, book reviews, editors picks, and more. Read it now
$38.00 FREE Shipping. Temporarily out of stock. Order now and we'll deliver when available. We'll e-mail you with an estimated delivery date as soon as we have more information. Your account will only be charged when we ship the item. Ships from and sold by Amazon.com. Gift-wrap available.
click to open popover

Editorial Reviews

Review

“In this important, sensible, and brilliantly argued book, Koppelman and Wolff cogently question, as incoherent law and bad policy, the view of our Supreme Court that a nonsectarian, noncommercial group, the Boy Scouts, have a constitutional right to discriminate, hobbling reasonable legislative efforts to protect vulnerable gay youth from the sometimes deadly ravages of homophobic prejudice.”—David A.J. Richards, Edwin D. Webb Professor of Law, New York University

(David AJ Richards)

"A short and sharp critique of broad constitutional protection for the association rights of non-profit organizations. The best extant defense of government intervention into the membership policies of organizations like the Boy Scouts of America."—David E Bernstein, Professor, George Mason University School of Law and author, You Can't Say That! The Growing Threat to Civil Liberties from Antidiscrimination Laws

(David E Bernstein)

“Andrew Koppelman and Tobias Wolff demolish the reasoning behind the Supreme Court decision holding that the Boy Scouts have a constitutional right to discriminate against gays—and also give us an incisive, subtle analysis of freedom of association.”—David A. Strauss, Gerald Ratner Distinguished Service Professor of Law, The University of Chicago Law School
(David A. Strauss)

About the Author

Andrew Koppelman is John Paul Stevens Professor of Law and professor of political science at Northwestern University School of Law. He lives in Evanston, IL. Tobias Barrington Wolff is professor of law, University of Pennsylvania Law School. He lives in Philadelphia.

NO_CONTENT_IN_FEATURE

New York Times best sellers
Browse the New York Times best sellers in popular categories like Fiction, Nonfiction, Picture Books and more. See more

Product Details

  • Hardcover: 192 pages
  • Publisher: Yale University Press (July 7, 2009)
  • Language: English
  • ISBN-10: 030012127X
  • ISBN-13: 978-0300121278
  • Product Dimensions: 5.7 x 0.9 x 8.3 inches
  • Shipping Weight: 10.4 ounces (View shipping rates and policies)
  • Average Customer Review: 3.0 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (1 customer review)
  • Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #2,349,993 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)

Customer Reviews

5 star
0%
4 star
0%
3 star
100%
2 star
0%
1 star
0%
See the customer review
Share your thoughts with other customers

Top Customer Reviews

By Philip Dinanzio on April 28, 2012
Format: Hardcover Verified Purchase
This book is a critique of the Supreme Court Case BOY SCOUTS v DALE, which allowed the Boy Scouts to be free of Anti-Discrimination laws, when they barred a homosexual scoutmaster from membership. The court reasoned that as a private organization they were not subject to public accomodation laws.

His reasoning is that since the common law forbade common carriers to deny service to the public, the court had no business overturning this concept. He compares this libertarian reasoning as akin to segregation statutes which required discrimination. This is a non-sequitor; these are two different concepts. No libertarian ever supported segregation statutes. However, the common law also restricted the rights of women to property, defering decisions to husband or father. The common law also allowed debtor's prisons. There were other legal restrictions that libertarians also opposed that I'm sure the author would not defend. So why defend this one?

Many of his arguments are mere assertions. For example, to exempt private concerns from government regulation in the name of individual rights, could mean the end of government controls!! It would validate the Lochner decision (which many scholars maintain this was a correctly decided case). He also states that without government being able to regulate private concerns, the economy would collapse!! This is asserted in contradiction to most empirical evidence which shows that the more controls, the worse the economy becomes (North vs. South Korea).

He states that the Boy Scouts are a monopoly, because the have a property interest in their name and symbols. This requires regulation. Why? The author has a property interest in his name and reputation. He gains from copyright laws for his writings.
Read more ›
3 Comments 6 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you? Yes No Sending feedback...
Thank you for your feedback.
Sorry, we failed to record your vote. Please try again
Report abuse