To: Law Religion issues for Law Academics
Subject: Re: Contraceptives and gender discrimination
Well, if Alan is right that there is a substantial burden every time tax
dollars are used by the state on something proscribed by someone's religion,
then the substantial burden component of RFRA
.; Richard Dougherty; Marci Hamilton
Cc: Con Law Prof list
Subject: RE: Contraceptives and gender discrimination
Suppose one accepts the argument about incidental burdens. What about the
RFRA's least restrictive means requirement? See 42 U.S.C. 2000bb-1(b)(2).
Do supporters of the contraceptives
: Contraceptives and gender discrimination
On the burden question -- Religious entities may limit hiring to
co-religionists, and then make their best efforts to enforce religious norms
against employees. Doesn't that option make the burden of the HHS policy far
less substantial?
I think
[mailto:religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of Steve Sanders
Sent: Monday, February 13, 2012 1:36 PM
To: 'Law Religion issues for Law Academics'
Subject: RE: Contraceptives and gender discrimination
Alan, I'm not denying the sincerity of those who truly see this as a religious
liberty
[mailto:religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu] *On Behalf Of *Ira Lupu
*Sent:* Monday, February 13, 2012 5:50 AM
*To:* Marc DeGirolami
*Cc:* Zietlow, Rebecca E.; Walsh, Kevin; Law Religion issues for Law
Academics; Con Law Prof list
*Subject:* Re: Contraceptives and gender discrimination
Religion issues for Law Academics'
Subject: RE: Contraceptives and gender discrimination
What if a hospital is run by a religious group that believes doctrinally and
sincerely in not using advanced technology or extraordinary interventions to
prolong human life. In response, the government says
Of Alan Brownstein
Sent: Monday, February 13, 2012 10:27 AM
To: Law Religion issues for Law Academics
Subject: RE: Contraceptives and gender discrimination
I have to admit that as long as we are talking about private resources, I have
a hard time understanding the argument that there is no burden
Professor of Law
Pepperdine Univ. School of Law
From: religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu
[mailto:religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of Marty Lederman
Sent: Tuesday, February 14, 2012 4:30 AM
To: Law Religion issues for Law Academics
Subject: Re: Contraceptives and gender discrimination
-boun...@lists.ucla.edu]
On Behalf Of Marty Lederman
Sent: Tuesday, February 14, 2012 4:30 AM
To: Law Religion issues for Law Academics
Subject: Re: Contraceptives and gender discrimination
Well, if Alan is right that there is a substantial burden every time tax
dollars are used by the state
'; 'Con Law Prof list'
Subject: RE: Contraceptives and gender discrimination
The wars of religion were very much about the locus of religious authority. Men
fought for, and men and women died for, the right to have a hierarchical church
with teaching authority at the top, or a congregational
Religion issues for Law Academics
Subject: Re: Contraceptives and gender discrimination
When government steps between private parties, there may be distributional
consequences of Religion Clause significance (TWA v. Hardison -- religious
accommodations of employees must be de minimis only, because
[mailto:religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of Alan Brownstein
Sent: Monday, February 13, 2012 11:25 AM
To: Law Religion issues for Law Academics
Subject: RE: Contraceptives and gender discrimination
Any legitimate issue can be manipulated politically. That doesn't stop it
from being a legitimate
Academics
Subject: RE: Contraceptives and gender discrimination
I have to admit that as long as we are talking about private resources, I
have a hard time understanding the argument that there is no burden on
religious institutions here. The private resources of religious institutions
Academics;
conlawp...@lists.ucla.edu
Subject: Re: Contraceptives and gender discrimination
Having been accused (perhaps justly) of being a source of dispirit in my
earlier posts (about religious institutions' ability to switch to
co-religionist hiring, and about measuring the sincerity of objections
Sent: Mon 2/13/2012 8:49 AM
To: Marc DeGirolami
Cc: Zietlow, Rebecca E.; Walsh, Kevin; Law Religion issues for Law Academics;
Con Law Prof list
Subject: Re: Contraceptives and gender discrimination
On the burden question -- Religious entities may limit hiring to
co-religionists, and then make
...@lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of Steve Sanders
Sent: Monday, February 13, 2012 12:51 PM
To: 'Law Religion issues for Law Academics'
Subject: RE: Contraceptives and gender discrimination
What if a hospital is run by a religious group that believes doctrinally and
sincerely in not using advanced
is?
Eugene
From: religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu
[mailto:religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of Marty Lederman
Sent: Tuesday, February 14, 2012 4:30 AM
To: Law Religion issues for Law Academics
Subject: Re: Contraceptives and gender discrimination
Well, if Alan is right
...@lists.ucla.edu
Subject: Re: Contraceptives and gender discrimination
Howard Friedman is correct that the USCCB has extended its concerns to secular
employers, who could not take advantage of the Title VII provision permitting
religious entities to hire only co-religionists (and then to fire sinners
: Contraceptives and gender discrimination
** **
On the burden question -- Religious entities may limit hiring to
co-religionists, and then make their best efforts to enforce religious
norms against employees. Doesn't that option make the burden of the HHS
policy far less substantial
for Law Academics;
conlawp...@lists.ucla.edu
Subject: Re: Contraceptives and gender discrimination
Having been accused (perhaps justly) of being a source of dispirit in my
earlier posts (about religious institutions' ability to switch to
co-religionist hiring, and about measuring the sincerity
? If not, why not?
_
From: religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu
[mailto:religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of Volokh, Eugene
Sent: Monday, February 13, 2012 11:04 AM
To: Law Religion issues for Law Academics
Subject: RE: Contraceptives and gender discrimination
Subject: Re: Contraceptives and gender discrimination
This explanation of the bishops' view from the NYT seems revealing of the
actual goal: The bishops will also renew their call for lawmakers to pass the
“Respect for Rights of Conscience Act,” which would exempt both insurance
providers
To: Marc DeGirolami
Cc: Zietlow, Rebecca E.; Walsh, Kevin; Law Religion issues for Law
Academics; Con Law Prof list
Subject: Re: Contraceptives and gender discrimination
On the burden question -- Religious entities may limit hiring to
co-religionists, and then make their best efforts
Subject: RE: Contraceptives and gender discrimination
Isn't there a difference here between (1) accepting specific
subsidies (federal funds) that the government insists be used for behavior
that furthers specific government goals, and (2) operat[ing] in the public
sphere by running
24 matches
Mail list logo
