Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/12/84; site mit-hermes.ARPA Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!mit-eddie!mit-hermes!jpexg From: jpexg@mit-hermes.ARPA (John Purbrick) Newsgroups: net.kids,net.legal,net.politics Subject: Re: ACLU and Parent's Rights (in re Walter Polovchak) Message-ID: <2496@mit-hermes.ARPA> Date: Sat, 28-Sep-85 20:02:49 EDT Article-I.D.: mit-herm.2496 Posted: Sat Sep 28 20:02:49 1985 Date-Received: Mon, 30-Sep-85 01:14:26 EDT References: <11821@rochester.UUCP> <1679@umcp-cs.UUCP> Organization: The MIT AI Lab, Cambridge, MA Lines: 10 Xref: watmath net.kids:2112 net.legal:2401 net.politics:11248 I just read a predictable column by George Will on this case in the Sunday paper. Yes, Walter Polovchak just turned 18, so the case has become moot: an adult (except for consumption of alcohol) isn't going to be sent to Russia. Will took delight in pointing out that the ACLU is on the opposite side in a similar Maryland case, except that there it's Chile the kid doesn't want to go back to. He claims that it's OK that justice isn't blind in the Polovchak case (ie, the Polovchaks could have taken Walter elsewhere against his will, but the USSR is different) because the USSR wouldn't let Walter leave again if he had wanted to after reaching adulthood, and hence he has to be protected in advance. A valid viewpoint, I suppose, but the Russians would be crazy to keep Walter under those circumstances. Brought to you by Super Global Mega Corp .com