ershill)
--- On Thu, 1/12/12, Volokh, Eugene wrote:
From: Volokh, Eugene
Subject: RE: Supreme Court sides with church on decision to fire employee on
religious grounds
To: "Law & Religion issues for Law Academics"
Date: Thursday, January 12, 2012, 3:20 PM
It strikes me
> Eugene
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu [mailto:religionlaw-
> > boun...@lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of Alan Brownstein
> > Sent: Thursday, January 12, 2012 3:08 PM
> > To: Law & Religion issues for Law A
ginal Message-
From: religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu
[mailto:religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of Volokh, Eugene
Sent: Friday, January 13, 2012 4:56 PM
To: Law & Religion issues for Law Academics
Subject: RE: Supreme Court sides with church on decision to fire employee on
reli
ssage-
From: religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu
[mailto:religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of Volokh, Eugene
Sent: Thursday, January 12, 2012 1:24 PM
To: Law & Religion issues for Law Academics
Subject: RE: Supreme Court sides with church on decision to fire employee on
religiou
A whole host of laws are now thrown into limbo as a result of the decision
-
For example NY Workers Compensation Law exempts the following from the
mandatory coverage provisions-
The applicant is a nonprofit (under IRS rules) with NO compensated
individuals providing services except for
clerg
sts.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of Alan Brownstein
> > Sent: Thursday, January 12, 2012 1:13 PM
> > To: Law & Religion issues for Law Academics
> > Subject: RE: Supreme Court sides with church on decision to fire
> > employee on religious grounds
> >
> > As you know, To
: Wednesday, January 11, 2012 12:34 PM
> To: Law & Religion issues for Law Academics
> Subject: Re: Supreme Court sides with church on decision to fire employee on
> religious grounds
>
> The decision is much narrower than Joel's description. It does not cover all
Original Message-
From: religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu
[mailto:religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of Alan Brownstein
Sent: Thursday, January 12, 2012 1:01 AM
To: Law & Religion issues for Law Academics
Subject: RE: Supreme Court sides with church on decision to fire employe
the ministerial exception or not.
>
> Alan
>
> -Original Message-
> From: religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu [mailto:religionlaw-
> boun...@lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of Berg, Thomas C.
> Sent: Thursday, January 12, 2012 7:28 AM
> To: Law & Religion issues for Law
is.edu]
Sent: Thursday, January 12, 2012 6:07 PM
To: Law & Religion issues for Law Academics
Subject: RE: Supreme Court sides with church on decision to fire employee on
religious grounds
We disagree -- in part because I think it would be easy to draft a formally
"religion-
Law Academics
Subject: RE: Supreme Court sides with church on decision to fire employee on
religious grounds
I think that if the government decided to give a religion-neutral
"charitable donation voucher" that congregants could give to their church, to
the ACLU, to a private scho
, Thomas C.
Sent: Thursday, January 12, 2012 7:28 AM
To: Law & Religion issues for Law Academics
Subject: RE: Supreme Court sides with church on decision to fire employee on
religious grounds
Alan, I'm not predicting two more justices, let alone with any certainty, or
talking about all
oun...@lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of Samuel Krieger
Sent: Thursday, January 12, 2012 4:35 PM
To: 'Law & Religion issues for Law Academics'
Subject: RE: Supreme Court sides with church on decision to fire employee on
religious grounds
A whole host of laws are now thrown into limbo as
Academics
> Subject: RE: Supreme Court sides with church on decision to fire employee on
> religious grounds
>
> We disagree -- in part because I think it would be easy to draft a formally
> "religion-neutral" voucher that would be used primarily and overwhelmingly
> by ch
_
From: religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu [religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu]
on behalf of Berg, Thomas C. [tcb...@stthomas.edu]
Sent: Wednesday, January 11, 2012 7:47 PM
To: Law & Religion issues for Law Academics
Subject: RE: Supreme Court sides with church on decision t
aw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu [mailto:
> religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu] *On Behalf Of *Marci Hamilton
> *Sent:* Wednesday, January 11, 2012 2:26 PM
> *To:* Law & Religion issues for Law Academics
> *Subject:* Re: Supreme Court sides with church on decis
ides with church on decision to fire employee on
religious grounds
Dear Marci,
I guess not, but I think people usually think of "clergy" as ordained, or as
otherwise officially designated. I think the opinion constitutionalizes an
exception that covers a broader category of "minis
] On Behalf Of Marci Hamilton
Sent: Wednesday, January 11, 2012 2:26 PM
To: Law & Religion issues for Law Academics
Subject: Re: Supreme Court sides with church on decision to fire employee on
religious grounds
Rick--I meant by clergy whatever the Court is saying is a "minister"
>
>
> Rick
>
>
>
> Richard W. Garnett
>
> Professor of Law and Associate Dean
>
> Notre Dame Law School
>
> P.O. Box 780
>
> Notre Dame, Indiana 46556-0780
>
>
>
> 574-631-6981 (w)
>
> 574-276-2252 (cell)
>
>
s.net/>
From: religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu
[mailto:religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of Marci Hamilton
Sent: Wednesday, January 11, 2012 12:34 PM
To: Law & Religion issues for Law Academics
Subject: Re: Supreme Court sides with church on decision to fire employee on
religious
The decision is much narrower than Joel's description. It does not cover all
employees of religious organizations--only clergy. And it only involves claims
involving discrimination against the religious organization,
leaving open litigation from even clergy on contract and tort theories.
Mar
onlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of Alan Brownstein
Sent: Wednesday, January 11, 2012 1:47 PM
To: Law & Religion issues for Law Academics
Subject: RE: Supreme Court sides with church on decision to fire employee on
religious grounds
Rick,
As to lay teachers at religious schools, the Court
p; Religion issues for Law Academics
> Subject: RE: Supreme Court sides with church on decision to fire employee on
> religious grounds
>
> Dear Marci,
>
> I guess not, but I think people usually think of “clergy” as ordained, or as
> otherwise officially designated. I
ehalf of Alan Brownstein [aebrownst...@ucdavis.edu]
Sent: Thursday, January 12, 2012 12:01 AM
To: Law & Religion issues for Law Academics
Subject: RE: Supreme Court sides with church on decision to fire employee on
religious grounds
Tom,
I have long since given up trying to predict how Supreme C
The Supreme Court has sided unanimously with a church sued for firing an
employee on religious grounds, issuing an opinion on Wednesday that
religious employers can keep the government out of hiring and firing
decisions.
In the case of Hosanna-Tabor v. EEOC, Cheryl Perich, a "called" teacher
25 matches
Mail list logo
