Well, the court has said that accommodating religion is not an establishment . . . .
> On Feb 22, 2016, at 1:50 PM, Ed Darrell <edarr...@sbcglobal.net> wrote: > > How does Congress get around the first requirement of laws on religion, that > "Congress shall make no law?" > > Interesting question, but like the computer said in War Games, perhaps "the > only way to win is not to play." > > Ed Darrell > Dallas > > > From: Steven Jamar <stevenja...@gmail.com> > To: Law Religion & Law List <religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu> > Sent: Monday, February 22, 2016 10:38 AM > Subject: help wanted > > How might Congress draft a federal law that requires states to accommodate > religious beliefs so that state employees are free to refuse to perform tasks > that are contrary to their religious beliefs? We have the Boerne problems of > making a record and RFRA being held to be too much of a bludgeon. But > assuming we could somehow get past that, what would the language be? Could > this work: > > "Every state must accommodate the religious beliefs and practices of its > employees and those persons with which it contracts by exempting them from > performing tasks that are contrary to their religious beliefs.” > > Even assuming the record-requirement part of Boerne could be met, I just > can’t seem to craft language that I think would be likely to pass > constitutional muster. > > So, help wanted. > > Steve > > > > -- > Prof. Steven D. Jamar > Howard University School of Law > vox: 202-806-8017 > fax: 202-806-8567 > http://sdjlaw.org <http://sdjlaw.org/> > > “It’s not the note you play that’s the wrong note – it’s the note you play > afterwards that makes it right or wrong.” > > Miles Davis > > > _______________________________________________ > To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu > <mailto:Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu> > To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see > http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw > <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. -- Prof. Steven D. Jamar Assoc. Dir. of International Programs Institute for Intellectual Property and Social Justice http://iipsj.org http://sdjlaw.org "A word is not a crystal, transparent and unchanged, it is the skin of a living thought and may vary greatly in color and content according to the circumstances and the time in which it is used." Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes in Towne v. Eisner, 245 U.S. 418, 425 (1918)
_______________________________________________ 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.
