In his pro se complaint, plaintiff Stephen Dunne seeks preliminary and permanent injunctions barring the defendants from considering the question in regard to his application to practice law and from enforcing the question in the current or future bar examinations. Dunne is also seeking a jury trial and unspecified compensatory and punitive damages. Stephen Dunne v. The Massachusetts Board of Bar Examiners, No. 07-11166 (D. Mass.)
Dunne claims his score of 268.866 on the November 2006 bar exam just missed the passing score of 270 points because he didn't follow the proscribed format for an unlawful question about gay marriage. Dunne said the question required applicants to "affirmatively accept, support and promote homosexual marriage and homosexual parenting." Dunne claims the defendants violated his First Amendment right to exercise his religion and violated the due process and equal protection clauses of the U.S. Constitution. He also claims their actions impose illegal state regulations on interstate commerce.
I don't have any sympathy for this applicant. He's trying to become a lawyer in a state where gay marriage is legal. To expect him to have knowledge about this area of the law isn't discriminatory; it's timely. If the courts decide he has a right not to answer this question because it offends him (for some reason not stated), what is to stop other applicants from protesting other questions about abortion, religion, or use of taxpayer funds?
The place to argue about the legality of gay marriage is in court once you have your bar card, not at the bar exam.
|