There's no "right" answer to these questions,
because there's extremely little caselaw, and even less consensus, on what
constituted a "substantial burden" in FEC law pre-Smith,
or under RFRA/RLUIPA. There's
Sherbert itself, of course, which suggests that the denial of at least
some types
I'm writing a short piece on the Freedom of Expressive
Association and Government Subsidies -- basically whether the government
may condition various broad subsidy programs (student group subsidies,
tax exemptions, school voucher programs, and the like) on the
participating groups' agreemen
Point of clarification. What are "rates of psychiatric
incidents"?
Brazilian have members emailed me to tell me that the drugs are good
for everyone, and especially adolescents. (Indeed, they go beyond and
claim marijuana is also great for children.) What was the record in this
suppose
Not sure I understand, Marc. In O Centro, Roberts wrote that in Smith, "we
rejected the interpretation of the Free Exercise Clause announced in Sherbert
v. Verner, 374 U.S. 398, 83 S.Ct. 1790, 10 L.Ed.2d 965 (1963), and, in accord
with earlier cases, see Smith, 494 U.S., at 879-880, 884-885, 11
Did anybody else notice that the Chief Justice
in Gonzales acknowledged that Smith overturned Sherbert, notwithstanding
Justice Scalia’s’ claim in Smith that the court had never held that
burdens on religious practice need compelling justification?
Marc Stern
From:
[EMAIL PROTEC
You assume that the placement of a drug on
Schedule I ends the discussion. I hope that you do not think that it is
jesting to suppose that that placement does not end the discussion. Congress
surely must have some sense of the consequences of its decisions (1) to place
the drug on Schedul
The government spent a year
preparing for the preliminary injunction hearing. The hearing itself
lasted nine days. The judge spent a year digesting the evidence and
writing the opinion. This was, in all but name, a full trial. If
there any evidence that religious use of this drug is da
In a message dated 2/23/2006 2:04:12 AM Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I don't
know anything about the dangers of hoasca,
If hoasca contains
DMT, it is an extremely dangerous drug, potentially more powerful than
LSD. The dissociation and hallucinations it caus
