I never read Smith that way — it was a straight up carte blanche to the legislative and executive branches provided the law was neutral and generally applicable — no weighing of competing interests involved.
Steve -- Prof. Steven D. Jamar Assoc. Dir. of International Programs Institute for Intellectual Property and Social Justice http://iipsj.org http://sdjlaw.org "A life directed chiefly toward the fulfillment of personal desires sooner or later always leads to bitter disappointment." Albert Einstein > On Nov 22, 2016, at 4:07 PM, Case, Mary Anne <mac...@law.uchicago.edu> wrote: > > judges the task of “weigh[ing] the social importance of all laws against the > centrality of all religious beliefs”(Smith)
_______________________________________________ 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.
