You can plead anything you want. And argue anything you want. That doesn’t mean
it will be plausible under Twombley, or that it won’t draw Rule 11 sanctions.
It would help if you would stay somewhere in the neighborhood of the arguments
actually being made. If you sue your local synagogue, it may have a RFRA or
free exercise defense, depending on what you are suing about. If a rule of law
substantially burdens the synagogue’s exercise of religion, it is not just you
who imposes the burden; it is the rule of law.
Douglas Laycock
Robert E. Scott Distinguished Professor of Law
University of Virginia Law School
580 Massie Road
Charlottesville, VA 22903
434-243-8546
From: religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu
[mailto:religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of hamilto...@aol.com
Sent: Thursday, February 27, 2014 11:00 AM
To: religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu
Subject: Re: Protecting Religious Conscience from Private Suits -- How far do
we go under the Const and under RFRAs?
Wait a minute-- so every dispute involving a believer that involves any law is
a potential constitutional case?
So I can add a free exercise claim to my trespass and nuisance action against
my neighbor?
Marci A. Hamilton
Paul R. Verkuil Chair in Public Law
Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law
Yeshiva University
55 Fifth Avenue
New York, NY 10003
(212) 790-0215
http://sol-reform.com <http://sol-reform.com/>
<https://www.facebook.com/professormarciahamilton?fref=ts>
<https://twitter.com/marci_hamilton>
-----Original Message-----
From: Douglas Laycock <dlayc...@virginia.edu <mailto:dlayc...@virginia.edu> >
To: 'Law & Religion issues for Law Academics' <religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu
<mailto:religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu> >
Sent: Thu, Feb 27, 2014 10:57 am
Subject: RE: Protecting Religious Conscience from Private Suits -- How far do
we go under the Const and under RFRAs?
It is not judicial enforcement as such. In contract cases, the challenged rule
comes from the contract. Shelley v. Kramer aside, enforcing the contract does
not make the provisions of the contract state action.
But when the challenged rule is written by the state, whether in a statute or a
common law rule, the burden is imposed by the rule of law. That rule of law is
the relevant state action.
Douglas Laycock
Robert E. Scott Distinguished Professor of Law
University of Virginia Law School
580 Massie Road
Charlottesville, VA 22903
434-243-8546
_______________________________________________
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.
