RE: Bible classes in elementary schools

I grew up in Charleston, W.Va. and attended Kanawha County public schools beginning in 1952 from the first grade through the ninth grade; even before Engle and Abbington Township, we did not have bible study classes. The school district was surprisingly compliant with the constitution as

Re: "California Court Issues TRO Against Kaporos Practices"

Josh, Excellent work within extremely short time constraints. Mike From: religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu on behalf of Volokh, Eugene Sent: Tuesday, October 11, 2016 8:30:01 AM To: Law & Religion

RE: "California Court Issues TRO Against Kaporos Practices"

ld be pretty similar.) Eugene From: religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu<mailto:religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu> [mailto:religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of Michael Masinter Sent: Sunday, October 9, 2016 8:18 PM To: Law & Religion issues for Law Academic

Re: "California Court Issues TRO Against Kaporos Practices"

Eugene, I recall that CA does not follow the collateral bar rule. If that's true, then can't the Chabad pursue a two track strategy--try to have the injunction vacated tomorrow, and failing that, just ignore it and defend any ensuing criminal contempt (or implausible remedial civil contempt

Re: "California Court Issues TRO Against Kaporos Practices"

Paul raises a question that surely would trigger an interesting debate among rabbinical authorities and Talmudic scholars, but I suspect from Hosanna Tabor and from the contraception mandate cases that a court would conclude the law burdens a religious practice if those who wish to engage in

RE: New Version of Proposed First Amendment Defense Act

between the priorities of (1) achieving protection of religious dissenters though exemption bills and (2) using exemption bills to resist Obergefell. FRC's statement indicates that there will be reluctance among some FADA supporters to sacrifice #2 to achieve #1. - Jim On Wed, Jul 13, 2

RE: New Version of Proposed First Amendment Defense Act

The “both sides” language may be a response to Judge Reeves’ injunction against enforcement of Mississippi’s HB 1523. Judge Reeves enjoined enforcement of HB 1523 in part because, in his view, it created a discriminatory religious preference, protecting those who for religious reasons opposed

RE: Assessing a Proposed Solution to the KY Case

What plausible reading of religious freedom empowers Ms. Davis to prohibit her deputies from issuing marriage licenses because of her religious objections to same sex marriage? I am genuinely astonished by the persistent claim that, in the name of religious freedom, we should compel license

RE: Assessing a Proposed Solution to the KY Case

Kevin, Under your proposed accommodation (leave aside the court order for now), who would issue marriage licenses in Rowan County? In your earlier post below, you write "the licenses are to be authorized by a human being holding a particular office (namely, by one of the 120 people holding

Good Faith (was What's happening in the Kim Davis case)

Aren’t good faith inquiries the inevitable consequence if, in adjudicating claimed state or federal RFRA exemptions from compliance with generally applicable law, courts must: 1. Accept without review the claimant’s determination that compliance substantially burdens religious exercise;

RE: More Davis strangeness

g licenses to couples seeking state marriage licenses in Rowan County. And then the court went ahead and decided in the context of a PI motion that RFRA didn't let Davis off the hook anyway. From: Michael Masinter <masint...@nsu.law.nova.edu<mailto:masint...@nsu.law.nova.edu>> Reply-To: Law &am

RE: More Davis strangeness

I don't see a basis for objecting under Rule 19 to the plaintiffs' choice of defendants in an official capacity claim for injunctive relief. The plaintiffs sought the issuance of marriage licenses from the county official designated by state law as the official with a ministerial duty to issue

RE:

Plaintiffs who do seek damages for establishment clause violations often do so to forestall potential mootness issues even absent any likelihood of substantial damages. Injunctive relief claims can become moot either because the plaintiff cannot show the injury is capable of repetition to her,

Bronx Household of Faith Decision

The city regulation forbidding the long term use of public school facilities for the conduct of religious worship services does not violate the free exercise clause, and, reaffirming an earlier panel decision, does not violate the free speech clause. http://tinyurl.com/lcosuva The 2-1 vote

Re: Subject: Re: Kansas/Arizona statutes protecting for-profit businesses

Doesn't Runyon v. McRary's resolution of the freedom of association claim, understood to be derived from the first amendment's protection of the freedom of speech, suggest the answer? The photographer has a first amendment right of expression that would protect the display of the sign,

Re: Warner v. City of Boca Raton

...@lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of Michael Masinter Sent: Monday, December 02, 2013 8:44 PM To: Law Religion issues for Law Academics; Christopher Lund Cc: Law Religion issues for Law Academics Subject: Re: Letter of 16 law professors in support of removing substantial as modifier of burden in state

Re: RLUIPA and hair length in prison

Why does RLUIPA as applied to state prisons unconstitutionally interfere with state sovereignty? RLUIPA is a spending clause statute; any state that objects to RLUIPA as an intrusion into its sovereignty is free to operate its prisons without federal financial assistance. To be sure

Re: RLUIPA and hair length in prison

officials on safety? Marci Marci A. Hamilton Verkuil Chair in Public Law Benjamin N. Cardozo Law School Yeshiva University @Marci_Hamilton On Jul 27, 2013, at 12:36 PM, Michael Masinter masin...@nova.edu wrote: The eleventh circuit's restatement of RLUIPA's compelling interest/narrowly

Re: RLUIPA and hair length in prison

The eleventh circuit's restatement of RLUIPA's compelling interest/narrowly tailored standard based on a snippet of legislative history and some language from Cutter v. Wilkinson respecting due deference would make George Orwell proud: Although the RLUIPA protects, to a substantial degree,

Re: FW: Fouche V. NJ Transit

of the First Amendment do not require accommodation -- at least where others are negatively impacted. Best wishes, Bob Ritter On July 27, 2012 at 10:16 PM Michael Masinter masin...@nova.edu wrote: Why, short of religious bias, would an employer ask about an applicant's religious

Re: FW: Fouche V. NJ Transit

at all will hire such a person. Proving that sort of employment discrimination is almost always impossible in individual cases Marc Stern. -Original Message- From: religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu [mailto:religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of Michael Masinter Sent: Friday, July 20

Re: FW: Fouche V. NJ Transit

in individual cases Marc Stern. -Original Message- From: religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu [mailto:religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of Michael Masinter Sent: Friday, July 20, 2012 11:56 To: religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu Subject: Re: Fouche V. NJ Transit The district court

Reaasonable acccommodations and Observant Sabbatarians

Does an employer's duty to reasonably accommodate the work scheduling needs of a sabbatarian employee include compelling objecting coworkers to accept involuntary shift reassignments requiring additional weekend work in the absence of a formal seniority system? Perhaps, says a split panel

Re: Fouche V. NJ Transit

The district court order in Fouche, reported at 2011 WL 2792450, seems unremarkable; the CBA was straightforward; a more senior driver returned to work, exercised his seniority rights not to work on Sunday, bumping Fouche into a Sunday assignment, and Fouche responded by not coming to work

RE: Ban on Feeding Homeless

The Eleventh Circuit sees neither a free speech nor a free exercise problem with time, place, and frequency restrictions on public feedings in traditional public fora. First Vagabonds Church of God v. City of Orlando, 638 F.3d 756 (11th Cir. 2011) (en banc) (assuming without deciding that

Re: Providing public school credits for release-time religious classes

Rick, If a public school district can award public school educational credit for two hours of purely religious release time instruction, what limiting principle constrains it from awarding ten or, for that matter, a full year's worth of public school credit for release time religious

RE: Providing public school credits for release-time religious classes

Zorach is a release time case; it is not an academic credit case. If the distinction between academic credit (Allen) and release time (Zorach) matters, and I think it does for reasons previously expressed, then Spartanburg is free to offer release time selectively for religious

RE: Providing public school credits for release-time religious classes

The tenth circuit's judgment upheld an injunction against the policy as it was written, and in doing so accurately cited Allen. The panel's later statement of what the school district might do on remand purported to decide an issue not before it (the constitutionality of a program the

Re: Religious exemptions and discrimination

Regarding Eugene's second point, I suspect the narrow scope of Title Two of the 1964 CRA speaks more to what was politically possible in 1964 than to a judgment that, with only narrow exceptions, businesses should be free to inflict dignitary harm by engaging in purposeful racial or

Re: Snyder v. Phelps

Perhaps Claiborne Hardware is the better analogy. Most of Clarence Evers' speech to the crowd consisted of protected speech on a matter of public concern -- a politically motivated boycott of white merchants to remedy racial discrimination. Taken in isolation, a couple of his statements

RE: Federal regulators apparently force bank to take down religioussymbols

[mailto:religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of Michael Masinter Sent: Tuesday, December 21, 2010 1:47 PM To: religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu Subject: RE: Federal regulators apparently force bank to take down religioussymbols Alan's examples of uniform language expressing racial

RE: Federal regulators apparently force bank to take down religioussymbols

I do not think a for profit fast food employer covered by Title VII can lawfully refuse a sincerely based request for a religious accommodation when that request is to refrain from wearing either There is no God or Jesus Christ is my Lord and Savior and, though there is no case that comes

RE: Federal regulators apparently force bank to take down religioussymbols

on. Eugene -Original Message- From: religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu [mailto:religionlaw- boun...@lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of Michael Masinter Sent: Tuesday, December 21, 2010 10:01 AM To: religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu Subject: RE: Federal regulators apparently force bank to take down

RE: Federal regulators apparently force bank to take down religioussymbols

, Mogen David, or There Is No God on uniforms, cars, burger wrappers, and so on? Eugene -Original Message- From: religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu [mailto:religionlaw- boun...@lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of Michael Masinter Sent: Tuesday, December 21, 2010 11:12 AM

Re: Federal regulators apparently force bank to take down religioussymbols

The Eleventh Circuit's recent religious discrimination, religious accommodation, and retaliation decision, Dixon v. The Hallmark Services, http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/201010047.pdf does not foreclose a reasonable accommodation claim or a disparate treatment claim by an

Re: Federal regulators apparently force bank to take down religioussymbols

a retaliation claim for opposing its refusal to accommodate her? On Mon, 20 Dec 2010 13:34:16 -0500 Michael Masinter masin...@nova.edu wrote: The Eleventh Circuit's recent religious discrimination, religious accommodation, and retaliation decision, Dixon v. The Hallmark Services, http

RE: No religious advertisements on municipal buses

The problematic case is Lehman v. City of Shaker Heights; if a city can ban political ads from a bus, presumably it can also ban religious ads, though it may matter whether the ads are inside or outside the bus (inside in Lehman). But I would have joined the Lehman dissenters, and I am

Re: Religious arbitration

The question seems as likely to arise when one party to the agreement seeks a judicial rather than an arbitral forum, the other party moves to compel arbitration, and the suing party opposes enforcement of the arbitration clause on the ground that the arbitral procedure, as structured, is

RE: Religious arbitration

that the tribunal accepts -- and this is so even if the actual religious beliefs of the two people were identical. And as I understand it race in 42 USC 1981 1982 has been interpreted (consistently with late 1800s practice) to include ethnicity. Eugene Michael Masinter writes

Re: TRO against Oklahoma no use of Sharia Law

For many agreements to arbitrate, the Federal Arbitration Act is the argument for enforcement; there is nothing in the FAA that would exempt agreements that provide for a religiously based arbitral forum. For others, analogous state statutes are the argument for enforcement. Michael R.

RE: N.J. public transit employee fired for blasphemy

In defense of Justice Breyer, I don't think he called into question first amendment doctrine as it might apply to Q'ran burning; the reported text of his remarks suggests only that he was speaking with the prudence of a Justice talking about a legal issue that might some day come before

Circumcision, Religion and Custody in Oregon

Apropos the ongoing discussion of the role religious beliefs should play in custody disputes, the Oregon Supreme Court decided today that a 12 year old boy should have some say in the custodial parent's decision to have him circumcisd, though that say should occur within the context of the

Re: InnerChange decision

Here's a link to the InnerChange decision, Americans United v. Prison Fellowship Ministries: http://www.au.org/site/DocServer/Innerchange_opinion.pdf?docID=861 Michael R. Masinter 3305 College Avenue Professor of LawFort Lauderdale, FL 33314 Nova

Re: Home Schooling and Real Covenants

As I read Rick's argument, it has consequences that extend far beyond RLUIPA and home schooling. Treating restrictive covenants as zoning regulations and their enforcement as state action subjects them to the same first and fourteenth amendment limits that constrain local governments in enacting

Re: Property Law and Religious Liberty/Constituional Law

The question Rick poses has been litigated; it routinely arose in the context of age restrictions barring occupancy by children enforced against grandparents whose grandchild moved in because of a family emergency, Rocek v. Markowitz, 492 So.2d 460 (Fla. App. 1986) or parents who unexpectedly

Re: Dover Intelligent-Design Case

Wouldn't individual board members have at least a plausible claim to legislative immunity? See Bogan v. Scott-Harris, 523 U.S. 44 (1998). Michael R. Masinter 3305 College Avenue Professor of LawFort Lauderdale, FL 33314 Nova Southeastern University

RE: Zionist-Occupied Government

On Tue, 13 Dec 2005, Larry Darby wrote: [snip] To understand the fallacy of calling someone anti-semitic, it's helpful to understand that semitic refers to a group of African-Asian languages, not Jews or any religion. Arabic, Ethiopic, Hebrew are just 3 of several semitic languages.

Re: RE:creationsim redux

Brad's hypothesis would be more convincing if the school's science books also included explanations that various religions posit(ed) a geocentric universe, reject germs and other physical explanations as a cause of disease, and offer supernatural explanations for weather phenomena. The reality is

Re: Voters Oust Dover School Board

On Wed, 9 Nov 2005 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I am not searching for conspiracies behind large oaks on dimly lit streets, but what impact would the immediate decision of the board, on their own judgments about intelligent design vs evolution, to eliminate ID instruction have on the

Re: Censoring Narnia

As far as I can tell, Americans United wisely has not threatened to sue anybody. Here's a link to their press release: http://tinyurl.com/b5lnd Michael R. Masinter 3305 College Avenue Professor of LawFort Lauderdale, FL 33314 Nova Southeastern

RE: Two kinds of purpose inquiries

Do Title VII and the religion clauses (the latter of course applied only to governmental employers) permit an employer to fire an employee for engaging in conduct that offends his religious beliefs? For an extreme example that answers the question no, see Venters v. City of Delphi, 123 F.3d 956

RE: Findings on Hostility at Smithsonian Noted in NRO Article

Rick's question below proceeds from a false premise; public school classrooms are not the public square. None of the posts have suggested that ID should be banned from the public square; the first amendment pretty obviously would forbid that, and on that point I suspect we would all agree. I see

Re: Findings on Hostility at Smithsonian Noted in NRO Article

Ed Brayton replied while I was away from my office with a link to the quite thorough critique written by Alan Gishlick, Nick Matzke, and Wesley R. Elsberry; I would have posted the same link, which should more than suffice. For a less technical but no less devastating critique of ID's claim to be

Re: religiously-motivated political strife

Don't overlook the anti-Catholic Know Nothing Party riots, including the Philadelphia Bible Riot of 1843: http://www.pbs.org/kcet/publicschool/photo_gallery/photo2.html Two sources approach the same history from different perspectives, but do not much disagree on what happened:

Re: Wait, there's more: Leading ID think tank calls Dover evolution policy misguided, calls for it to be withdrawn

How does evolution appear to violate the laws of thermodynamics? And if it does, why haven't physicists figured it out? Michael R. Masinter Visiting Professor of Law On Leave From University of Miami Law School Nova Southeastern University

Fl Voucher Program Unconstitutional

So says Florida's First District Court of Appeal, construing the Florida Constitution's no aid provision in Article One, Section Three, which provides: No revenue of the state . . . shall ever be taken from the public treasury directly or indirectly in aid . . . of any sectarian institution.

Re: New religious speech at school controversy

But see Holloman v. Harland, 2004 WL 1178465 (11th Cir. May 28, 2004) denying qualified immunity to a teacher who disciplined a student for silently raising a fist during the pledge of allegiance and concluding that the allegation, if proved, would establish a violation of the first amendment.

11th Circuit Holds RLUIPA unconstitutional

http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/200313858.pdf Michael R. Masinter 3305 College Avenue Nova Southeastern UniversityFort Lauderdale, Fl. 33314 Shepard Broad Law Center(954) 262-6151 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Chair, ACLU of

Re: 11th Circuit Holds RLUIPA . . . *constitutional*

] Chair, ACLU of Florida Legal Panel On Wed, 21 Apr 2004, Marty Lederman wrote: Uh, that should be constitutional. And it's a section 2(b)(1) case, too -- probably the most difficult subsection to justify under section 5. - Original Message - From: Michael

Re: HAnsen v. Ann Arbor Public Schools 293 FSupp2d 780

I don't think the ACLU argument in Hurley is either bizarre or the product of interest group politics. A good amicus brief should assist the Court irrespective of whether it supports a party. Though the ACLU, like other organizations, often agrees with one party or another, and signals that

Re: FYI An Interesting Case

I think it's pretty clear that ATT is free to implement a progressive antidiscrimination policy that encompasses the protection of its gay and lesbian employees over the objections of its religious employees, and that it need not accommodate them by exempting them from that policy. See

Re: FYI An Interesting Case

, Michael MASINTER wrote: The only other alternative acceptable to Peterson--taking down all the [diversity] posters--would also have inflicted undue hardship upon Hewlett-Packard because it would have infringed upon the company's right to promote diversity and encourage

Re: California Contraceptive Decision

Are there prescription contraceptives for men? If the only prescription contraceptives currently on the market are prescribed for use exclusively by women, then why couldn't a legislature reasonably conclude that excluding prescription contraception from coverage under an employer provided health