Do we get anymore out of this opinion on this issue than the fact the Sixth
Circuit reaches the wrong decision regarding whether she is an employee or a
minister? There several tests out there and none are explicitly embraced or
rejected.
Marci
On Jan 11, 2012, at 2:47 PM, Alan
The decision is much narrower than Joel's description. It does not cover all
employees of religious organizations--only clergy. And it only involves claims
involving discrimination against the religious organization,
leaving open litigation from even clergy on contract and tort theories.
From: religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu
[mailto:religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of Marci Hamilton
Sent: Wednesday, January 11, 2012 2:26 PM
To: Law Religion issues for Law Academics
Subject: Re: Supreme Court sides with church on decision to fire employee on
religious
I agree with David, though I would characterize the Court's paradigmatic
concern as being about the right to choose selection criteria. Catholics and
Orthodox Jews plainly have the right to favor men over women and Hosanna Tabor
Lutherans have the right to choose mediators instead of
.
On Jan 11, 2012, at 10:07 PM, David Cruz dc...@law.usc.edu wrote:
I agree. :-)
And great to have seen you in DC!
David B. Cruz
Professor of Law
University of Southern California Gould School of Law
Los Angeles, CA 90089-0071
U.S.A.
On Jan 11, 2012, at 6:49 PM, Marci Hamilton
of Justice
Law, Religion, and Ethics
From: religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu
[mailto:religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of Marci Hamilton
Sent: Wednesday, January 11, 2012 12:34 PM
To: Law Religion issues for Law Academics
Subject: Re: Supreme Court sides with church on decision
I assumed that the reference to tortious conduct left open cases like
Bollard. This is another important aspect of the Court refusing to make the
ministerial exception, whatever its scope,
a jurisdictional bar.
Marci
On Jan 12, 2012, at 3:38 PM, Ira Lupu wrote:
Does the line of
I have no doubt whatsoever that Doug is sincere when he talks about his
commitment to civil liberties more generally, but Hosanna-Tabor is the
clearest case to date showing
that religious liberty is a zero sum game. For increases in the rights of
religious organizations, there are concomitant
Ok, I'll bite. Why is an anti-coercion statute obviously unconstitutional?
Marci
On Jan 24, 2012, at 4:45 PM, Volokh, Eugene vol...@law.ucla.edu wrote:
An Arkansas 1891 statute: “No person shall coerce, intimidate or unduly
influence, any elector to vote for or against the nominee of any
A side note on some of the discussion --As someone who was clerking at the
Court the Term that Smith was decided, I find it jarring to hear law professors
talk about Smith as though only one Justice either wrote it or voted for it.
That is not how cases are decided or majorities reached
Lots of Catholics go to Saturday evening mass. Relevant?
On Mar 3, 2012, at 2:55 PM, Alan Armstrong alanarmstrong@verizon.net
wrote:
My understanding is that Jewish and 7th day adventists consider sabbath as
going from sundown on Friday to sundown on Saturday. I do not know of any
I'm sure it goes without saying that Rick is
incorrect about Smith. It did not gut anything
It was a case of first impression in the Court's
eyes and rightly so. That is what the
historical record at the Court establishes
clearly. Folks can dislike Smith but lets
at least nuance the
Thanks Rick for your viewpoint. It does not answer
my constitutional or public policy question.
Marci
On Mar 3, 2012, at 2:02 PM, Rick Duncan nebraskalawp...@yahoo.com wrote:
This was clearly the right thing to do. An association of private religious
schools should be eager to
., by
Wikipedia's article on Smith), but I can't see how that goes without saying.
Rich Friedman
At 06:27 PM 3/3/2012, Marci Hamilton wrote:
I'm sure it goes without saying that Rick is
incorrect about Smith. It did not gut anything
It was a case of first impression in the Court's
eyes
can't see how that goes without saying.
Rich Friedman
At 06:27 PM 3/3/2012, Marci Hamilton wrote:
I'm sure it goes without saying that Rick is
incorrect about Smith. It did not gut anything
It was a case of first impression in the Court's
eyes and rightly so. That is what the
historical
Frankly, common sense or at least a full evaluation of all of the non religious
interests seems lacking on the side of those claims accommodation.
On Mar 3, 2012, at 6:41 PM, Volokh, Eugene vol...@law.ucla.edu wrote:
The trouble with “common sense” is that it often points in
There is significant precedent for one-religion sporting events, which I assume
everyone agrees is fine.Catholic Leagues exist in numerous cities And the
Maccabiah Games feature only Jewish athletes.
TAPPs' first mistake appears to have been opening itself up to religious
organizations
religious test for individuals?
On Mon, Mar 5, 2012 at 10:06 AM, Marci Hamilton hamilto...@aol.com wrote:
There is significant precedent for one-religion sporting events, which I
assume everyone agrees is fine.Catholic Leagues exist in numerous cities
And the Maccabiah Games feature
Why is anger at a publicly licensed cab picking and choosing passengers
according to religious belief anything like anti-Muslim animus? Cabbies can't
reject passengers on race. Why should they be able to reject those with
religious beliefs different from their own? If they don't want to
I agree with Paul here, and with the TAPPs ultimate decision which they should
have reached earlier. Rick seemed to imply that I and others might not agree
with it so I wanted to clarify my comments As I said originally, I was asking
the big picture question. These events have many moving
Here is a general question to take us back to the bigger picture.
What should the rule for sports associations be in the future? Schedule
tournaments and finals only Mon through Sunday with attention to the religious
schedule?
How can you schedule such a tournament in light of the
[mailto:religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of Marci Hamilton
Sent: Wednesday, March 07, 2012 3:39 PM
To: Law Religion issues for Law Academics
Cc: Law Religion issues for Law Academics
Subject: Re: Discrimination against people with religious motivations for
their actions
I
PM, Marci Hamilton wrote:
Lots of Catholics go to Saturday evening mass. Relevant?
On Mar 3, 2012, at 2:55 PM, Alan Armstrong alanarmstrong@verizon.net
wrote:
My understanding is that Jewish and 7th day adventists consider sabbath as
going from sundown on Friday to sundown
Eugene-- just a point of information--is there a lead MN Sup Court case that
applying strict scrutiny in cases involving neutral generally applicable laws
and worship conduct that is illegal?
Thanks!
On Mar 7, 2012, at 3:11 PM, Volokh, Eugene vol...@law.ucla.edu wrote:
But
I have to say that I find Steve's analysis more sound and based on common
sense.
Marci
On Mar 7, 2012, at 3:07 PM, Volokh, Eugene vol...@law.ucla.edu wrote:
I think the analysis below is mistaken: Whether or not cabbies’ refusal to
carry alcohol should be barred by some general
This is a statement of their preferred public policy not constitutional law.
Marci
On Apr 13, 2012, at 6:47 AM, Marty Lederman lederman.ma...@gmail.com wrote:
The Conference of Catholic Bishops just issued this major Statement on
Religious Liberty:
Cutter only addressed the facial Establishment Clause attack on the prison
provisions of RLUIPA. It did not protect any particular program or exemption
from attack
Marci
On Apr 12, 2012, at 7:19 PM, Volokh, Eugene vol...@law.ucla.edu wrote:
Maybe it would and maybe it
litigation might not be.
Eugene
From: religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu
[mailto:religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of Marci Hamilton
Sent: Monday, April 16, 2012 1:33 PM
To: Law Religion issues for Law Academics
Cc: Law Religion issues for Law Academics
Subject
Eugene-what about strict scrutiny?
I think there is a compelling interest in protecting children from being hit
with wooden dowels
Given the hidden nature of most such abuse, there is unlikely to be a lesser
restrictive method to ensure children are not harmed.
Marci
On May 13, 2012, at
the propriety of holy
war, and the like.
Eugene
From: religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu
[mailto:religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of Marci Hamilton
Sent: Sunday, May 13, 2012 4:24 PM
To: Law Religion issues for Law Academics
Cc: Law Religion issues for Law
The truth is that gay rights and child protection communities went all out in
North Dakota. Most Americans when they understand that a RFRA opens the door
to discrimination or child sex abuse or medical neglect quickly cool on the
extremism of a RFRA. The difference is public education
of Missouri Is a good case to start with
Marci
On Jun 14, 2012, at 9:31 AM, Arthur Spitzer artspit...@gmail.com wrote:
Marci - I don't believe you've stated the facts of a single case. I'd say the
same thing if you were a man.
Art
On Thu, Jun 14, 2012 at 7:27 AM, Marci Hamilton hamilto...@aol.com
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 Marci Hamilton
Sent: Thursday, June 14, 2012 10:02 AM
To: Law Religion
There is a significant federal RFRA litigation burden in the diocesan
bankruptcies. Marty and I have been on opposite sides litigating it. I
currently represent the victims in the Milwaukee Archdiocesan bankruptcy on the
RFRA and First Amendment issues.
I have seen state rfras pled in many
The Sherbert/Yoder test was never treated by the
Supreme Court as a test available across the
board. So NARAL's concerns and CHILD 's
Issues would not have been controlled by it
The concern is not over enforcement but rather enforcement
Giving religious groups more power to endanger children
...@lists.ucla.edu
[mailto:religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of Marci Hamilton
Sent: Thursday, June 14, 2012 6:44 PM
To: Law Religion issues for Law Academics
Cc: Law Religion issues for Law Academics
Subject: Re: Religious exemptions and child sexual abuse
There is a significant federal RFRA
Public schools should also be held to the same standard as any private
institution and it should be child-protective
Marci
On Jun 15, 2012, at 11:04 AM, Douglas Laycock dlayc...@virginia.edu wrote:
It is not just other constitutional interests that limit liability for harm
to children. It
Wireless BlackBerry
-Original Message-
From: Marci Hamilton hamilto...@aol.com
Sender: religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu
Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2012 03:08:48
To: Law Religion issues for Law Academicsreligionlaw@lists.ucla.edu
Reply-To: Law Religion issues for Law
Marty is undoubtedly correct under current doctrine. The release time program
exists I assume to avoid Establishment Cl problems. To now argue entanglement
is a problem is a constitutional sleight of hand to avoid a violation.
The entanglement argument is particularly weak given the
Academics
Subject: Re: Providing public school credits for release-time religious
classes
Unless, like Niemeyer, you think that four Rs, not three, are integral to
the public school mission.
Sent from my iPhone
On Jun 30, 2012, at 1:55 PM, Marci Hamilton hamilto...@aol.com wrote
at 2:59 PM, Marci Hamilton hamilto...@aol.com wrote:
I would like some clarification from those relying on purported parental
rights. The use of the term parental right is freighted w social and
cultural value but very little legal value.
Pierce v Society of Sisters is balanced by Prince
some beer with my younger son
-- he'll be 22 in a few weeks. I have a 13 year old grandson coming to visit
tomorrow, and I'll have to think twice about offering him a bottle.
On Thu, Jul 5, 2012 at 8:19 PM, Marci Hamilton hamilto...@aol.com wrote:
I would disagree with Chip that the concept
younger son
-- he'll be 22 in a few weeks. I have a 13 year old grandson coming to visit
tomorrow, and I'll have to think twice about offering him a bottle.
On Thu, Jul 5, 2012 at 8:19 PM, Marci Hamilton
hamilto...@aol.commailto:hamilto...@aol.com wrote:
I would disagree with Chip
As long as it is a case-by-case analysis, I am on board. But I think the
presumption of religion as good is folly for the vulnerable.
Marci
On Jul 10, 2012, at 10:10 AM, Andrew M M Koppelman
akoppel...@law.northwestern.edu wrote:
I said that the value of religion sometimes outweighs other
Title: An Email from Zoosk
Marci Hamilton has added you as a friend on Zoosk.
Is Marci Hamilton your friend?
Yes
No
This message was sent by a Zoosk
29, 2013 at 11:25 AM, Marci Hamilton hamilton.ma...@gmail.com
wrote:
At this stage in history, Alito's view is in fact decisively sectarian. The
vast majority of opposition is theological w theological sources. That is
the political reality. And his sources and arguments are derived directly
Michael-- how do you read Cutter's several statements that require deference
to prison officials on safety?
Marci
Marci A. Hamilton
Verkuil Chair in Public Law
Benjamin N. Cardozo Law School
Yeshiva University
@Marci_Hamilton
On Jul 27, 2013, at 12:36 PM, Michael Masinter masin...@nova.edu
As I understand the process, Doug reassured folks on the left that RLPA as
applied to land use law would not apply to the civil rights laws, particularly
the fair housing laws. Not sure how to square that w Doug's current
statements.
I also find the in pari materia argument disingenuous at
I think it is critically important to remember that RLPA was rejected
categorically by the members as much too broad. The history w respect to
anything other than land use and prisons are the only histories that have any
reliable content to them for future interpretation.
Post-enactment
There is no all in the legislative process. There are only competing
interests and conflicting sides. I am not going to belabor this for this
exchange, but as someone who was as intimately involved in this as Doug, but on
the opposite side, his description encompasses some but not all of what
, Marci Hamilton hamilto...@aol.com wrote:
Except that 1997 itself is an irrelevant date. The relevant dates are
1990-93, during the enactment of RFRA.
Marci
Marci A. Hamilton
Verkuil Chair in Public Law
Benjamin N. Cardozo Law School
Yeshiva University
@Marci_Hamilton
On Aug 2
in
commercial activity.
On Fri, Aug 2, 2013 at 8:17 AM, Marci Hamilton hamilto...@aol.com wrote:
Except that 1997 itself is an irrelevant date. The relevant dates are
1990-93, during the enactment of RFRA.
Marci
Marci A. Hamilton
Verkuil Chair in Public Law
Benjamin N. Cardozo Law School
I assume they were serious and hope they were.
If you are a woman with unstoppable bleeding as part of your periods, or
excruciating cramps,
this is medication and treatment that is indeed compelling. If you cannot go
to work for 5 days every month because of the severity of your periods,
governmental rational basis, of course, but not a
governmental compelling interest.
Just my 2¢,
Michael
--
Michael Worley
BYU Law School, Class of 2014
On Thu, Aug 15, 2013 at 10:33 AM, Marci Hamilton hamilto...@aol.com wrote:
I assume they were serious and hope they were.
If you
I agree w Chip and Jim on the baseline issue, but also the previous point about
the point of the Religion Clauses is not just rights for the believer but also
the path to peace in a diverse religious culture. Lee and Bowen v Roy stand
for the proposition that if one chooses to employ or to
I was not suggesting only the burden on taxpayers, though when it comes to a
national scheme of healthcare, I think the compelling interest standard is met
by women's reproductive health.
I was also suggesting the govt has a compelling interest in (1)ensuring women
have reasonable means of
with abortion, government
does not need to fund it--the compelling interest is in not making it illegal.
Jon
On 2013-08-17 10:57, Marci Hamilton wrote:
I agree w Chip and Jim on the baseline issue, but also the previous
point about the point
Thanks, Ellis, for your valuable post. Let's also add that the framing
generation understood and articulated a distinction between liberty and
licentiousness, as I have written before. And set a boundary on religious
liberty of safety and the public good. Indeed, pastors preached abiding by
But if you take the restoration part of RFRA seriously, Lee and Bowen are the
lead cases in these scenarios. I don't think you can have it both ways that
RFRA restores the prior case law and it requires radical new ways of reasoning
w respect to large federal or state administrative programs.
Reread the entirety of the memorial.
Madison was very concerned about the abusive power of the clergy.
Marci A. Hamilton
Verkuil Chair in Public Law
Benjamin N. Cardozo Law School
Yeshiva University
@Marci_Hamilton
On Aug 18, 2013, at 6:20 PM, Richard Dougherty dou...@udallas.edu wrote:
I
. Scarberry
Professor of Law
Pepperdine Univ. School of Law
-Original Message-
From: religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu
[mailto:religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of Marci Hamilton
Sent: Sunday, August 18, 2013 3:03 PM
To: Law Religion issues for Law Academics
Cc: Law
That's right, Brad, if you want to have a for-profit company in a free market
economy, you shouldn't be able to choose your customers based on race, gender,
sexual orientation, or religion. Isn't that how the market works best-- being
fueled by products and price, rather than purchaser's or
Wedding photography is speech for money, and a lot of it. The photographer
who depicts the wedding in a non- joyous manner is not going to get paid, is
going to receive terrible reviews online, and even be boycotted. She or he
will find themselves with no wedding jobs. The photographer who
And if the NYT refused to include same- sex couples in its wedding section, it
would be sued. Or mixed race couples. Or to sell to same-sex couples.
Except for the narrow issue in Hosanna Tabor, First Amendment rights do not
immunize you from the civil rights laws.
Marci A. Hamilton
Where is the potential civil rights violation in this hypothetical?
Marci A. Hamilton
Verkuil Chair in Public Law
Benjamin N. Cardozo Law School
Yeshiva University
@Marci_Hamilton
On Aug 23, 2013, at 8:45 AM, Michael Worley mwor...@byulaw.net wrote:
Are people who support the decision in
Let me clarify: the issue in New Mexico is a conflict between the civil rights
of same sex couples and for-profit photographers who hold themselves out as a
public accommodation.The govt does not have civil rights.
Marci A. Hamilton
Verkuil Chair in Public Law
Benjamin N. Cardozo Law School
Point of law-- Most freelancers are subject to work for hire agreements that
divest copyright and make the purchaser the owner of the speech for all
purposes.
Marci A. Hamilton
Verkuil Chair in Public Law
Benjamin N. Cardozo Law School
Yeshiva University
@Marci_Hamilton
On Aug 24, 2013,
to
write.
Eugene
From: religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu
[mailto:religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of Marci Hamilton
Sent: Saturday, August 24, 2013 10:26 AM
To: Law Religion issues for Law Academics
Cc: Law Religion issues for Law Academics
Subject: Re
This isn't lunch-- it is medical treatment for women. (Contraceptive meds may
work against some Catholics' beliefs but they are often taken for
non-contraceptive reasons, so the contraception label for this is
religio-centric).
And women have a civil right against these employers not to be
, 2013 at 4:37 PM, Marci Hamilton hamilto...@aol.com wrote:
This isn't lunch-- it is medical treatment for women. (Contraceptive meds
may work against some Catholics' beliefs but they are often taken for
non-contraceptive reasons, so the contraception label for this is
religio-centric
Chip-- it might be a standing issue regarding the religious discrimination but
I still think it has legs because, eg, a Presbyterian is having her job
benefits limited solely according to religion that she doesn't share, in
contravention of both economics and health standards. Shaping a
Marty- one addition --women will also have to pay for oral contraceptives to
stop excessive bleeding, cramps, and hormone- triggered acne. I think this
discussion needs to factor in the medical uses beyond contraception for
millions of women over the course of their lives.
Marci
Marci A.
I certainly hope they will rely on these statutes which are evidence of (1) the
ingrained and ongoing persistence of gender discrimination across society and
in private institutions; (2) the need to be vigilant as these hard-fought
rights can be compromised at any time; and (3) this religious
Tom-- they are not opposed to the Pill?
Marci A. Hamilton
Verkuil Chair in Public Law
Benjamin N. Cardozo Law School
Yeshiva University
@Marci_Hamilton
On Nov 27, 2013, at 12:16 PM, Berg, Thomas C. tcb...@stthomas.edu wrote:
In response to Chip,
As to the plaintiffs in Hobby Lobby and
[mailto:religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of Marci Hamilton
Sent: Wednesday, November 27, 2013 12:32 PM
To: Law Religion issues for Law Academics
Cc: Law Religion issues for Law Academics
Subject: Re: Discrimination under Title VII and RFRA (was Patently
Frivolous)
Tom
Few quick observations and then my work through of the Title VII and RFRA
factors.
These employers oppose sterilization, not just medicines. Does that affect
Eugene's analysis? Also--Is there a sincerity point to be raised given they
are religiously opposed to all contraception but basing
Chris-- As I mentioned, CT's has been amended through interpretation You are
right about Alabama.
I actually think these terms matter and removal of substantial violates the
Establishment Clause but it also shows the endless push by religious entities
to overcome all laws. I assume the
The Texas municipal league and civil rights groups -- especially those
protecting children's and women's and gay rights -- would disagree w the notion
substantial is irrelevant. And the TX legislature had no interest,
or so I am told by those groups on the ground in Texas. I don't want the
if it is.
On Dec 2, 2013, at 12:44 PM, Marci Hamilton hamilto...@aol.com wrote:
Chris-- As I mentioned, CT's has been amended through interpretation You
are right about Alabama.
I actually think these terms matter and removal of substantial violates
the Establishment Clause but it also
in phrasing--burden, substantial burden, or
restriction on religious liberty,--would matter in deciding cases?
Again I may be wrong about this and I really would like to be corrected if I
am. But I have seen no evidence that these differences have practical payoff.
On Dec 2, 2013, at 1:45 PM, Marci
on
describing religious groups as having lobbyists and an agenda, and implying
that other groups are wholly selfless and decent? Or is that just semantic
advocacy?
On Dec 2, 2013, at 12:45 PM, Marci Hamilton hamilto...@aol.com wrote:
The Texas municipal league and civil rights groups
I find it interesting that Doug concedes in this thread that results in RFRA
cases turn on the judge's predilections on religious liberty regardless of the
law's language. I have witnessed this lack of neutrality in several cases,
most notably the ruling by Judge Randa in the Milwaukee
Chip has cut to the chase (thank you)
i would add that Eugene's reasoning further underscores how RFRA is in fact a
non-ratified amendment to the First Amendment, as the Court pointed out in a
footnote in Boerne. Advocates for it like Eugene cannot build in all the
rules they like by
From: religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu
[mailto:religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of Marci Hamilton
Sent: Tuesday, December 03, 2013 8:14 AM
To: Law Religion issues for Law Academics
Cc: Law Religion issues for Law Academics
Subject: Re: RFRA, the Establishment Clause
It depends on the state actually. But generally the confession must be for
spiritual/salvation purposes
Marci A. Hamilton
Verkuil Chair in Public Law
Benjamin N. Cardozo Law School
Yeshiva University
@Marci_Hamilton
On Dec 5, 2013, at 12:32 PM, Paul Horwitz phorw...@hotmail.com wrote:
Is
Richard's point is fair so let me provide some more context that perhaps would
be helpful.
Privileges are concoctions of positive law dealing w what information can be
excluded in the judicial process. The confessional privilege is no different
than the attorney client privilege or the
of calling
Catholics to abide by their own beliefs.
Richard Dougherty
University of Dallas
On Sat, Dec 7, 2013 at 7:45 AM, Marci Hamilton hamilto...@aol.com wrote:
Richard's point is fair so let me provide some more context that perhaps
would be helpful.
Privileges are concoctions
This exchange, which shows both Marty and Eugene's high qualifications for
public service, underscores how RFRA (and RLUIPA) turn federal courts into
super legislatures and violate the separation of powers -- as Boerne ruled. No
court in my view is institutionally competent to make these
, Marci Hamilton hamilto...@aol.com wrote:
This exchange, which shows both Marty and Eugene's high qualifications for
public service, underscores how RFRA (and RLUIPA) turn federal courts into
super legislatures and violate the separation of powers -- as Boerne ruled.
No court in my view
Free exercise on the Mountaintop illustrates well the problems
with the theory that Smith was right
On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 2:37 PM, Marci Hamilton hamilto...@aol.com wrote:
This reasoning is based on the mythology created around the free exercise
clause by the reactions to Smith
Eugene- I take it you would not have overturned the Lochner line of cases?
Your defense of unaccountable, robust policy making by judges would revive the
federal court's role in those cases and reverse the reasoning of, eg,
Williamson v lee optical.You have also failed to articulate any
this standard, and possibly Baker v. Carr or Miranda.
On Dec 28, 2013, at 10:51 PM, Marci Hamilton
hamilto...@aol.commailto:hamilto...@aol.com
wrote:
Eugene- I take it you would not have overturned the Lochner line of
cases?
Your defense of unaccountable, robust policy making by judges would
doing without free exercise
issues.
On Mon, Dec 30, 2013 at 10:08 AM, Marci Hamilton hamilto...@aol.com wrote:
There needs to be more precision in the use of the term rights.
RFRA is in fact an attempt by Congress to amend the Free Exercise Clause by
simple majority vote
Of Marci Hamilton
Sent: Saturday, December 28, 2013 5:29 PM
To: Law Religion issues for Law Academics
Cc: Law Religion issues for Law Academics (religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu)
Subject: Re: courts and lawmaking
Eugene- I take it you would not have overturned the Lochner line of cases?
Your
Marty-- could you please elaborate on your response? I am not following this
exchange
Thanks--
Marci
Marci A. Hamilton
Verkuil Chair in Public Law
Benjamin N. Cardozo Law School
Yeshiva University
@Marci_Hamilton
On Jan 3, 2014, at 12:43 PM, Marty Lederman lederman.ma...@gmail.com wrote:
Marty-- I apologize for missing this because I think it raises an important
distinction. Thanks for raising it.
I am saying in part that Smith supports a reading of beyond the judicial ken,
but I was basing my argument more on the Court's structural jurisprudence
(which Boerne fits
their political nature and give the public
the impression that the Supreme Court decides based on the preconceived views
of those who become Justices.
Jon
On 2014-01-04 11:29, Marci Hamilton wrote:
Marty-- I apologize for missing this because I
the community.
Judy Baer
Sent from my iPhone
On Jan 5, 2014, at 11:41 AM, Marci Hamilton hamilto...@aol.com wrote:
Michael-- My answers are interlineated below
1. Congress never debated the contraception mandate as part of Obamacare.
Thus the religious right never lost
for girls to leave
the community.
Judy Baer
Sent from my iPhone
On Jan 5, 2014, at 11:41 AM, Marci Hamilton hamilto...@aol.com
[13] wrote:
Michael-- My answers are interlineated below
1. Congress never debated the contraception mandate as part of
Obamacare. Thus the religious right
of Justice
Twitter: @RickGarnett
From: religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu
[mailto:religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of Marci Hamilton
Sent: Friday, January 03, 2014 1:42 PM
To: Law Religion issues for Law Academics
Cc: Law Religion issues for Law Academics
Subject: Re
1 - 100 of 119 matches
Mail list logo
