I think there is no legal or doctrinal basis for her statement. But the practical reality is that the damages are emotional or dignitary, and juries are generally unsympathetic, so plaintiffs usually don't seek damages and don't recover much when they do.
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] On Behalf Of Marc Stern Sent: Friday, June 12, 2015 9:44 AM To: Law & Religion issues for Law Academics Subject: In Smith v Jefferson County Bd. of School Comm'rs, 13-5957,decided yesterday by the Sixth Circuit,, the concurring judge(Judge Batchelder) said flat out that "We do not grant monetary damages for violations of the Establishment Clause." No authority is cited for that proposition ,other than a remark that EC relief is "equitable in nature. " I know that other courts have awarded such damages, although with the exception of one 10th Circuit case, I don't know of any published opinions. Is Judge Batchelder right about this claim? I understand it will often be difficult to prove or quantify such damages, but I don't see a blanket rule against them. Marc D. Stern General Counsel AJC 212 891 1480 646 289 2707 (c ) 212 891 1495 (f) ste...@ajc.org <mailto:ste...@ajc.org> www.ajc.org <http://www.ajc.org/> Facebook.com/AJCGlobal <http://www.facebook.com/AJCGlobal> Twitter.com/AJCGlobal <http://www.twitter.com/AJCGlobal>
_______________________________________________ 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.