boun...@lists.ucla.edu
[mailto:religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of Marty Lederman
Sent: Tuesday, December 03, 2013 3:44 PM
To: Law & Religion issues for Law Academics
Subject: Re: Burdens on others -- compelling interest vs. Establishment Clause
Which HHS accommodation? The first -- exempting
Which HHS accommodation? The first -- exempting churches altogether -- in
theory does not impose as much of a burden on their employees, because
those entities already have a right (under title VII) to prefer
coreligionists and insist that they comply with religious obligations --
that is to say,
I sympathize with the argument that there is a compelling
government interest in preventing costs on third parties, and that this may
justify rejecting the RFRA claim. I think the doctrine here is especially
uncertain, but there's much to be said for that argument as a reason fo
