The good news is that this isn't just a remand ordering a lower court to decide, but rather an invitation to resolution for both parties that keeps rights intact and does not stretch RFRA past its breaking point.
The Court's decision seems to (appropriately) put the Court in the role of a mediator as Sherry Colb (Cornell University School of Law) presciently noted in her article, "What Might a Mediator Do for the Parties to the Contraceptive Case in the Supreme Court?" (April 21, 2016) - https://verdict.justia.com/2016/04/21/what-might-a-mediator-do-for-the-parties-to-the-contraceptive-case-in-the-supreme-court This decision proves that these kinds of "do or die" cases when the inextricably parties lock into battle don't necessarily have to lead to legal bloodshed. An alternative dispute resolution approach where consensus is the driving factor might be the best way forward to resolving issues of conflicting rights on a number of different issues. I wrote on using ADR to resolve these kinds of issues earlier this year and I hope that parties to these kinds of disputes will recognize the benefits of stipulated resolutions rather than ordered resolutions that simply invite legislative or legal rebuttals in perpetuity - https://law.pepperdine.edu/nootbaar-institute/annual-conference/content/michael-d.-peabody.pdf While some think that the ship on peaceful resolution sailed once the Supreme Court granted cert., the Court's opinion has granted the parties grace to give it one more chance. Maybe I'm overly optimistic, but I am hopeful that both sides will seriously consider this an opportunity for working together rather than a hindrance to a complete binary "victory." Michael Peabody, Esq. ReligiousLiberty.TV (My blog on today's decision in Zubik - http://religiousliberty.tv/supreme-court-tells-parties-contraceptive-mandate-cases-figure.html ) On Mon, May 16, 2016 at 7:36 AM, Will Esser <willes...@yahoo.com> wrote: > Just out from the Court. > > http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/15pdf/14-1418_8758.pdf > > Will Esser > > _______________________________________________ > 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. _______________________________________________ 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.
