Say that Directive #78 had a ban on specifically religious attire. (That sort of classification does happen. Pennsylvania, like some other states, has a statute that forbids public school teachers from wearing religious garb * a statute that both the district and appellate court mention in Webb for support.) As per what Professor Cruz said earlier, is there widespread agreement that this rule would be invalid under the Smith/Lukumi Free Exercise Clause? I certainly think so. But I have a hard time reconciling this with Cooper v. Eugene Sch. Dist., 480 U.S. 942 (1987), where the Supreme Court dismissed a challenge to an Oregon statute that forbade public school teachers from wearing religious dress. Does anyone know what to make of Cooper in this post-Smith day and age? Best, Chris ______________________ Christopher C. Lund Assistant Professor of Law Mississippi College School of Law 151 E. Griffith St. Jackson, MS 39201 (601) 925-7141 (office) (601) 925-7113 (fax) Papers: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/cf_dev/AbsByAuth.cfm?per_id=363402
>>> dc...@law.usc.edu 4/8/2009 10:24 AM >>> I don't understand why counsel would not have argued starting with the complaint that a rule against wearing *religious* symbols or attire was not a "neutral law of general applicability" and thus should receive strict scrutiny under the federal Free Exercise Clause. David B. Cruz Professor of Law University of Southern California Gould School of Law 699 Exposition Blvd. Los Angeles, CA 90089-0071 U.S.A. -----Original Message----- From: religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu [mailto:religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of Joel Sogol Sent: Wednesday, April 08, 2009 2:05 AM To: Religionlaw Subject: Law.com - 3rd Circuit Rejects Muslim Cop's Bid to Wear Religious Scarf A Muslim woman who works as a Philadelphia police officer has lost her court battle to wear a religious head scarf on the job now that the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled that forcing the department to accommodate her would compromise the city's interest in maintaining "religious neutrality" in its police force. http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1202429736190 _______________________________________________ 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.
_______________________________________________ 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.
