Students in my Con Law of Religion course want to devote a class to the
Religion Clauses issues in the “Muslim ban” cases. I would welcome suggestions
as to what materials to assign, especially to a group that may not have other
Con Law experience.
ligionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu<mailto:religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu>
[mailto:religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of Case, Mary Anne
Sent: Tuesday, February 21, 2017 4:08 PM
To: Law & Religion issues for Law Academics
Subject: RE: Re-upping: Sterling: A helpful test case o
Consider the following exception to Chip’s first proposition below, that "’
secular cost’… does no work in cases involving the religious freedom of
prisoners” a particularly timely exception since it comes from a Gorsuch
opinion:
In Abdulhaseeb v. Calbone, 600 F.3d 1301 (10th Cir 2010), a
Gorsuch’s Hobby Lobby concurrence characterizes the Amish claim in US v Lee as
follows:
“The employer's faith taught that it is sinful to accept governmental
assistance. By being forced to pay social security taxes on behalf of his
employees, the employer argued, he was being forced to create
back on judicially
recognized RFRA rights. You might look at my post- Hobby Lobby piece in Harv J
of Law & Gender, where I discuss this in detail,
On Tue, Nov 22, 2016 at 5:02 PM Case, Mary Anne
<mac...@law.uchicago.edu<mailto:mac...@law.uchicago.edu>> wrote:
Fro
by
legislatures selectively cutting back as Chris Lund has documented I’m less
sure.
On Tue, Nov 22, 2016 at 4:26 PM, Case, Mary Anne
<mac...@law.uchicago.edu<mailto:mac...@law.uchicago.edu>> wrote:
The quoted language comes directly from Scalia’s opinion in Smith. The full
sentenc
onal 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, M
Other than his stray remarks at the Hobby Lobby oral argument (for example
noting that RFRA went beyond the pre-Smith case law in mandating not just a
compelling state interest but narrow tailoring) did Scalia ever in any venue
set forth his views on RFRA (for example expressing disappointment
As the quixotic quest for less restrictive alternatives to the contraception
mandate accommodation proposed by the Obama Administration continues, am I
right to think that, from the perspective of the employee contraceptive users,
a concern has to be confidentiality because, to the extent their
igionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu>
<religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu<mailto:religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu>>
on behalf of Case, Mary Anne
<mac...@law.uchicago.edu<mailto:mac...@law.uchicago.edu>>
Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2016 10:35:20 AM
To: Law & Religion issues fo
Is there, as far as any of you know, any available compilation of background
factual data concerning all of the for profit objectors to the ACA
contraception mandate, including, for example, such information as their
religious affiliation, their corporate form, the familial relationships of
Eugene asks, “ Why wouldn’t that be a legally enforceable contract ?” What
consideration is there for the Church and its agents? Conversion is a benefit
to the convert, not the Church. Consider a secular analogue, plaintiff seeks
to participate in the rituals of a secular organization, be it
I've had the following questions about the Zubik oral argument which I'm hoping
the list can help with, since the passage of time has not led me to what I
assume are obvious answers:
1) Why does everyone on the Court seem so blithely to agree with Paul
Clement that for the government to
13 matches
Mail list logo
