ts.ucla.edu>
[religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu<mailto:religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu>]
on behalf of Marty Lederman
[lederman.ma...@gmail.com<mailto:lederman.ma...@gmail.com>]
Sent: Sunday, June 15, 2014 2:04 PM
To: Law & Religion issues for Law Academics
Subject: Two mo
religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu [
> religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu] on behalf of Marty Lederman [
> lederman.ma...@gmail.com]
> *Sent:* Sunday, June 15, 2014 2:04 PM
> *To:* Law & Religion issues for Law Academics
> *Subject:* Two more Hobby Lobby posts
>
>I'm
@lists.ucla.edu]
on behalf of Marty Lederman [lederman.ma...@gmail.com]
Sent: Sunday, June 15, 2014 2:04 PM
To: Law & Religion issues for Law Academics
Subject: Two more Hobby Lobby posts
I'm under no illusion that such things could possibly have any influence on the
Court at this late d
I'm under no illusion that such things could possibly have any influence on
the Court at this late date (majority opinions having been in circulation
for at least two weeks now), but thought it might be worth posting two
further entries on Hobby Lobby, in anticipation of the decision:
http://balki
