ed. Being denied the ability to proselytize or even merely speak might not seem to be as great of an injury as being expelled or placed in detention, but is the distinction constitutionally significant?
Roman Storzer
___
To post, send message to Religionlaw@
While it couldn't seriously be argued that "preventing the disturbance of quality of
life"--without more-- reaches the level of compelling interest, preventing noise
levels from reaching a certain painful level or during the night could be said to
further an actual--and not imagined--public heal
Describing RLUIPA as destruction of residential
quality of neighborhoods is, at the very least, a matter of perspective. It
could certainly be argued that the existence of houses of worship enhances
community life, and for every case involving the “horrors” of a megachurch that
are referre
To the extent that the Establishment
Clause today commands some sort of parallelism between the review of laws that favor
and disfavor religion--and nothing in Davey appears to me to suggest a retreat
from this principle--the opinion would seem to lower the bar for both types. The
former
