Can I ask a quick question for people like Marci, Marty, and others who doubt the existence of a “substantial burden”?
What about United States v. Lee? The Amish object to paying Social Security taxes. The government makes them. The decision to use the taxes for Social Security is the government’s, not the Amish. The Amish say, “Well, we object to giving you money to pay for that.” The Court says there’s a burden. Isn’t this case just Lee again? What am I missing? (If I’ve missed earlier posts discussing this, I’m sorry.) Best, Chris
_______________________________________________ To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the messages to others.
