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.
