RE: May court decide whether religious arbitration procedures were followed

. It seems to me that there is a confusion in the opinion between two issues: (1) cases implicating the church autonomy doctrine and the constitutional protections afforded religious institutions to govern themselves and (2) religious arbitration cases where the parties have signed an arbitration

RE: May court decide whether religious arbitration procedures were followed

Subject: RE: May court deciding whether religious arbitration followed Dear Eugene, It strikes me that, regrettably, the headline is a bit misleading and so, perhaps, unnecessarily inflammatory. I mean, it is not the case that a judge simply ordered the use of Islamic law, right? I assume

RE: May court deciding whether religious arbitration followed

22903 434-243-8546 From: religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu [mailto:religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of Volokh, Eugene Sent: Tuesday, March 22, 2011 11:47 AM To: Law Religion issues for Law Academics Subject: May court deciding whether religious arbitration followed Any

RE: May court decide whether religious arbitration procedures were followed

arbitration of secular disputes just like secular arbitration of secular disputes, or whether we attach independent significance to the fact that it's a religious tribunal. But this one sounds like religious arbitration of a religious dispute. Note too that judicial review of secular arbitration

RE: May court decide whether religious arbitration procedures were followed

or not the arbitrators followed the procedures selected by the parties in their arbitration agreement. (2)Because this was a religious arbitration, the court would have to render a view regarding Islamic procedural law in order to determine whether or not the correct procedures were followed. (3

Religious arbitration

chosen from a pool in which women are deliberately not included? I should say that I've in the past defended the propriety of religious arbitration, see http://volokh.com/posts/1202446904.shtml; and I myself would likely accept, on freedom of contract grounds, agreed-to arbitrations

RE: Religious arbitration

The Section on Jewish Law is doing a program on religious arbitration at the AALS in January. Folks interested in this thread may be interested in that program. I am supposed to speak at that program, which means I have to learn a lot about religious arbitration between now and then. So keep

Re: Religious arbitration

that the arbitrators were chosen from a pool in which women are deliberately not included? I should say that I've in the past defended the propriety of religious arbitration, see http://volokh.com/posts/1202446904.shtml; and I myself would likely accept, on freedom of contract grounds, agreed

RE: Religious arbitration

I'm not sure whether 42 USC 1981 would apply to arbitral tribunals' decisions about which witnesses to consider; but if it does, I wonder how it would apply to Beth Dins. As I understand it, certain kinds of witnesses before those tribunals must be adult, male, Sabbath observing Jews.

RE: Religious arbitration

I have not seen the question litigated, and because the arbitral parties are the only parties likely to raise the witness's rights, the absence of litigation is not surprising. But racially based witness disabilities were a badge or incident of servitude, and therefore within the reach of

RE: Religious arbitration

[religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of Volokh, Eugene [vol...@law.ucla.edu] Sent: Thursday, November 11, 2010 12:22 PM To: Law Religion issues for Law Academics Subject: RE: Religious arbitration I'm not sure whether 42 USC 1981 would apply to arbitral tribunals' decisions about

RE: Religious arbitration

- From: religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu [mailto:religionlaw- boun...@lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of Finkelman, Paul paul.finkel...@albanylaw.edu Sent: Thursday, November 11, 2010 10:11 AM To: Law Religion issues for Law Academics Subject: RE: Religious arbitration Eugene: I do not think