I suppose this case would force the court to either reverse Reynolds or
conclude that RFRA does not apply to statutes that are not directly prohibiting
religious conduct; Fischer would presumably have to argue that this faith
required him to marry a third wife and that he must marry her before s
Marci Hamilton writes:
> I would assume that rfra does not undermine neutral, generally
applicable felonies.
I'm confused -- I thought it was clear that the purpose of RFRA
(rightly or wrongly) was precisely to authorize some claims of
exemptions from generally applicable laws, includin
In a message dated 8/6/08 9:44:58 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> I do not believe there is a precedent that is analogous involving underage
> sex and/or polygamy.
>
>
I assume there's not a case on point, but what does that matter when there's
a statute on point?
**
Looking
In a message dated 8/6/2008 9:35:22 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Didn't it do precisely that in the O Centro case?
Fair point, but I think not dispositive. O Centro came out as it did only
because of the specious comparison between peyote and hoasca -- the Co
In a message dated 8/6/08 9:11:28 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> I would assume that rfra does not undermine neutral, generally applicable
> felonies.
>
Didn't it do precisely that in the O Centro case?
**
Looking for a
car that's sporty, fun and fits in your budget? Read reviews
No court has agreed with a polygamy law challenge under any theory since
Reynolds. And there have been over 100 challenges (I seem to remember close to
130 when I was working on an amicus brief in the recent swenson/Utah case) What
is different since all of the sherbert and yoder-based challenge
State v. Fischer, 2008 WL 2971520 (Ariz. App.), upholds a
statutory rape conviction of Kelly Fischer, a member of the
Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints. Fischer was
married, and then took a second wife, Lujean, though of course she was
not recognized as a wife lega
