;
Sent: Tuesday, January 7, 2014 1:01 PM
Subject: Re: The nonprofit contraception services cases
Courts can always test sincerity and the substantiality of the burden though in
these cases, several courts have treated "substantial" as functionally
irrelevant.
What strikes me as od
.
From: lip...@au.org
To: religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu
Subject: Re: The nonprofit contraception services cases
Date: Tue, 7 Jan 2014 19:30:40 +
Stuart, is your position that all women should stop using oral contraception,
and/or (2) employers are better equipped to weigh the benefits/risks of
con
u>
[mailto:religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of Greg Lipper
Sent: Monday, January 06, 2014 3:21 PM
To: Law & Religion issues for Law Academics
Subject: Re: The nonprofit contraception services cases
One further note, related to Marci's question, and detailed in our interve
http://monographs.iarc.fr/ENG/Monographs/vol91/index.php and
http://abcnews.go.com/Health/birth-control-linked-heart-attack-stroke/story?id=16559498,
for example.
> CC: religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu<mailto:religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu>
> From: hamilto...@aol.com<mailto:hamilto
th" here.
See http://monographs.iarc.fr/ENG/Monographs/vol91/index.php and
http://abcnews.go.com/Health/birth-control-linked-heart-attack-stroke/story?id=16559498,
for example.
> CC: religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu
> From: hamilto...@aol.com
> Subject: Re: The nonprofit contraception serv
Ok-- I am confused. Is Derek saying federal funds subsidiz Notre Dame's health
care system?
Marci A. Hamilton
Verkuil Chair in Public Law
Benjamin N. Cardozo Law School
Yeshiva University
@Marci_Hamilton
> On Jan 6, 2014, at 8:45 PM, "Gaubatz, Derek" wrote:
>
> It seems to me that there
It seems to me that there is a much less nefarious explanation. In the context
of those Establishment Clause challenges, it was permissible for a religious
entity like Notre Dame to receive the government funds so long as they were not
used for items deemed to be inherently religious activities
gt;>
>>>
>>>
>>> Richard W. Garnett
>>>
>>> Professor of Law and Concurrent Professor of Political Science
>>>
>>> Director, Program on Church, State & Society
>>>
>>> Notre Dame Law School
>>>
>>
am on Church, State & Society
>>> Notre Dame Law School
>>> P.O. Box 780
>>> Notre Dame, Indiana 46556-0780
>>> 574-631-6981 (w)
>>> 574-276-2252 (cell)
>>> rgarn...@nd.edu
>>>
>>> To download my scholarly papers, please visit my SSRN
for Law Academics
Cc: Law & Religion issues for Law Academics
Subject: Re: The nonprofit contraception services cases
This is strictly an informational question-- is Notre Dame allowed to
discriminate on the basis of religion in undergraduate admission?
Marci A. Hamilton
Verkuil Chair in Publi
ary 06, 2014 3:08 PM
To: Law & Religion issues for Law Academics
Cc: Law & Religion issues for Law Academics
Subject: Re: The nonprofit contraception services cases
This is strictly an informational question-- is Notre Dame allowed to
discriminate on the basis of religion in undergra
Professor of Political Science
>>>
>>> Director, Program on Church, State & Society
>>>
>>> Notre Dame Law School
>>>
>>> P.O. Box 780
>>>
>>> Notre Dame, Indiana 46556-0780
>>>
>>> 574-631-6981
rnett
>
> From: religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu
> [mailto:religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of Marci Hamilton
> Sent: Monday, January 06, 2014 3:08 PM
> To: Law & Religion issues for Law Academics
> Cc: Law & Religion issues for Law Academics
>
ll)
>>
>> rgarn...@nd.edu
>>
>>
>>
>> To download my scholarly papers, please visit my SSRN
>> page<http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/cf_dev/AbsByAuth.cfm?per_id=342235>
>>
>>
>>
>> Blogs:
>>
>>
>>
>> Prawfsbla
ByAuth.cfm?per_id=342235>
>
>
>
> Blogs:
>
>
>
> Prawfsblawg <http://prawfsblawg.blogs.com/>
>
> Mirror of Justice <http://mirrorofjustice.blogs.com/>
>
>
>
> Twitter: @RickGarnett <https://twitter.com/RickGarnett>
>
>
>
> *F
Religion issues for Law Academics
Subject: Re: The nonprofit contraception services cases
This is strictly an informational question-- is Notre Dame allowed to
discriminate on the basis of religion in undergraduate admission?
Marci A. Hamilton
Verkuil Chair in Public Law
Benjami
; From: religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu
> [mailto:religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of Marci Hamilton
> Sent: Friday, January 03, 2014 1:42 PM
> To: Law & Religion issues for Law Academics
> Cc: Law & Religion issues for Law Academics
> Subject: Re: The nonp
ry 03, 2014 1:42 PM
To: Law & Religion issues for Law Academics
Cc: Law & Religion issues for Law Academics
Subject: Re: The nonprofit contraception services cases
Marty-- could you please elaborate on your response? I am not following this
exchange
Thanks--
Marci
Marci A. Hamilton
Verku
Will Esser
Charlotte, North Carolina
From: Ira Lupu
To: Law & Religion issues for Law Academics
Cc: Law & Religion issues for Law Academics
Sent: Friday, January 3, 2014 12:08 PM
Subject: Re: The nonprofit contraception services cases
Why don
I meant that shorthand only to repeat what I wrote in my post:
The *Little Sisters* case reveals a lacuna in the government's "secondary
accommodation" regulation that the government itself presumably did not
anticipate--namely, that the regulation does not guarantee contraception
coverage for fem
Marty-- could you please elaborate on your response? I am not following this
exchange
Thanks--
Marci
Marci A. Hamilton
Verkuil Chair in Public Law
Benjamin N. Cardozo Law School
Yeshiva University
@Marci_Hamilton
On Jan 3, 2014, at 12:43 PM, Marty Lederman wrote:
> They will -- the govern
They will -- the government realizes that its plan is undermined and is
reassessing
Sent from my iPhone
On Jan 3, 2014, at 12:08 PM, Ira Lupu wrote:
> Why don't all these religious nonprofits choose Christian Brothers Services
> as their health insurer? That way, certification or not, the em
Why don't all these religious nonprofits choose Christian Brothers Services as
their health insurer? That way, certification or not, the employees will not
receive the services to which the employer objects? Something is missing from
this narrative.
Sent from my iPhone
> On Jan 3, 2014, at
The government's brief in *Little Sisters*:
http://balkin.blogspot.com/2014/01/government-bref-in-little-sisters.html
On Wed, Jan 1, 2014 at 5:34 PM, Marty Lederman wrote:
> Another post, this one about the nonprofit cases that have now wound their
> way to the Court . . .
>
>
> http://balkin.b
24 matches
Mail list logo
