Re: Re-upping: Sterling: A helpful test case on RFRA burdens

eligionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu> [mailto:religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of Eric J Segall Sent: Monday, February 20, 2017 3:47 PM To: Law & Religion issues for Law Academics <religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu<mailto:religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu>>; Marty L

Re: Re-upping: Sterling: A helpful test case on RFRA burdens

Beautifully said Doug. I would just add that the kind of potential abuse you are talking about is maybe inevitable when this kind of law becomes part of the culture wars, and RFRA certainly has become that. Even Justice Alito has given speeches saying the potential non-enforcement of RFRA has

Re: Hostility vs. feeling that certain people shouldn't marry each other

eligionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu> [mailto:religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of Eric J Segall Sent: Wednesday, October 12, 2016 3:36 PM To: Law & Religion issues for Law Academics <religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu<mailto:religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu>> Subject: Re: Hostility vs. fee

RE: Noteworthy, puzzling scholars' brief in Arlene Flowers

Ira wrote that “I have no idea how to parse such distinctions among religious objections to various types of marriage, and I agree that courts should not try to evaluate the respect that one deserves compared to the other (nor label some of them as prejudice and others as properly

Re: Scalia's views of RFRA?

I respectfully object to the term "committed originalist," (self-promoting articles omitted). Kind of hoping you were being 100% saracastic. e Sent from my iPhone On Nov 22, 2016, at 5:26 PM, Ira Lupu > wrote: No apologies necessary except for

Re: Noteworthy, puzzling scholars' brief in Arlene Flowers

I am receptive to trying to draw lines between commercial activities that are inherently expressive and those that are not (knowing there will be quite grey areas). But I think there is a serious difference in the real world between a seller of flowers whose objection to same-sex marriage at

Re: Noteworthy, puzzling scholars' brief in Arlene Flowers

e is a special sacrament created by God for men and women.” How are courts to tell whose understanding of the proper theological interpretation is right? Eugene From: religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu<mailto:religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu> [mailto:religionlaw-boun...@list

Re: Trinity Lutheran and the ERISA cases - Do Churches Want Special Treatment or Not?

The first sentence of Mark's email is partly why many of us keep writing over and over that there is no longer a real difference between Originalists and non-Originalists... e Sent from my iPhone On Apr 22, 2017, at 11:19 AM, Mark Scarberry

Re: Trinity Lutheran and the ERISA cases - Do Churches Want Special Treatment or Not?

Well said Chip, and if there was a true originalist on the Court, there isn't, they'd know the only true original meaning of Article III that we are sure about is there must be two adverse parties. In this case, there aren't. Best, Eric Sent from my iPhone On Apr 21, 2017, at 5:24 PM, Ira

Re: Is Trinity Lutheran Church moot?

ble remedies. Douglas Laycock Robert E. Scott 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> [mailto:religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu] O

Re: Is Trinity Lutheran Church moot?

I don't think there was a claim for damages (and it would be barred by 11th Amendment anyway) so I agree with Marty that the plaintiff has received all the relief it sought. The State is saying that from now on, the church's requests for funding under the program will be treated like all other

Re: Is Trinity Lutheran Church moot?

.edu<mailto:religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu> [mailto:religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of Eric J Segall Sent: Tuesday, April 18, 2017 5:13 PM To: Law & Religion issues for Law Academics <religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu<mailto:religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu>> Subject: Re: Is T

Re: Is Trinity Lutheran Church moot?

Doug, is the complaint seeking money as damages for wrongful denial? That seems to run into the 11th. I assumed plaintiffs can only ask for prospective relief in this case. Best, Eric Sent from my iPhone On Apr 18, 2017, at 5:04 PM, Laycock, H Douglas (hdl5c)

Re: Is Trinity Lutheran Church moot?

a.edu<mailto:religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu> [mailto:religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of Eric J Segall Sent: Tuesday, April 18, 2017 5:13 PM To: Law & Religion issues for Law Academics <religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu<mailto:religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu>> Subject: Re: Is Trin

Re: Is Trinity Lutheran Church moot?

ates. We therefore conclude that neither the reasoning of Monell or of our Eleventh Amendment cases subsequent to Edelman, nor the additional legislative history or arguments set forth in Mr. Justice BRENNAN's concurring opinion, justify a conclusion different from that which we reached in Edelman.

Re: Trinity Lutheran and the ERISA cases - Do Churches Want Special Treatment or Not?

When I worked for DOJ in the late 80's and litigated a major Chapter (now I think Title) 2 funding case in San Francisco, the main plaintiff's lawyer was a devout 7th Day Adventist who strongly feared government grants to religious schools would ultimately dissipate religious freedom. Many

Re: Johnson Amendment E.O.

Depends entirely on whether Justice Alito gets his way. e From: religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu on behalf of David Cruz Sent: Thursday, May 4, 2017 11:12:19 AM To: Law & Religion issues for Law

Re: Johnson Amendment E.O.

I am new to this issue so pardon what might be an ignorant question. The government says to most non-profits if you want special tax treatment, you must give up certain rights to political speech. If that is constitutional, it seems like the government could say to churches if you want special

Re: Johnson Amendment E.O.

sts.ucla.edu<mailto:religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu> [religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu<mailto:religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu>] on behalf of Eric J Segall [eseg...@gsu.edu<mailto:eseg...@gsu.edu>] Sent: Thursday, May 04, 2017 9:03 PM To: Law & Religion issues for