Law and Religion
-
Mammon & Co.
I have already blogged about the question whether corporations can assert religious rights, for example to ask for exemptions from generally applicable laws if these laws contradict their ― or their owners’ ― religious beliefs. In a decision issued this morning, Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores, which Eugene Volokh summarizes here, the Supreme Court of Continue reading
-
Cui Bono?
In a post published last week, Josh Blackman points to an important question that can help us think about the permissibility of public prayer ― not only prayer at municipal council meetings (the post’s immediate context), which the U.S. Supreme Court recently considered in Town of Greece v. Galloway (a case I briefly discussed here) and which Continue reading
-
All Greek
On Monday, the Supreme Court of the United States delivered its judgment in the case of Town of Greece v. Galloway, finding constitutional the town’s practice of opening the monthly meetings of its board with a prayer read by a “chaplain of the month,” chosen from among the town’s religious congregations. I have blogged about Continue reading
-
Danger in Definition
I blogged some time ago about the difficulties that courts face when trying to define religion. In a recent interview, Judge Guido Calabresi (of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit), makes some interesting comments about this issue. (Most of Judge Calabresi’s interview deals with the case of Town of Greece v. Galloway, Continue reading
-
Charte de la honte et fédéralisme (II)
J’ai soutenu hier, me fondant sur l’arrêt de la Cour suprême dans Saumur c. City of Québec, [1953] 2 SCR 299, que la constitution ne permet pas aux provinces d’adopter des lois dont le caractère véritable consiste à limiter la liberté de religion (même si elles peuvent adopter des lois qui ont la limitation de la liberté Continue reading
-
La Charte de la honte et le fédéralisme (I)
J’ai déjà soutenu que, dans la mesure où elle serait justifiée comme une mesure de lutte à l’intégrisme religieux, la Charte de la honte du Parti québécois excède les compétences législatives du Québec. Cependant, il semble improbable que l’argument, manifestement fallacieux, de la lutte à l’intégrisme soit en fait invoqué devant les tribunaux pour justifier Continue reading
-
Not Established
I wrote in my last post about a brief recently submitted to the U.S. Supreme Court arguing that an act of Congress which exempts religious believers from the application of any law that interferes with their religious beliefs and practices unless the law is the least restrictive means to realize a compelling government objective is Continue reading
-
Room for Disagreement
The issue of the respective roles of courts and legislatures in defending ― and defining ― individual rights and liberties is a controversial one. Some, like Jeremy Waldron, argue that protecting rights is the legislatures’ job, at least in the last resort. Others, like Dahlia Lithwick and Sonja West, apparently believe that rights are the exclusive preserve Continue reading
-
Le voile et le cadenas
Depuis une dizaine de jours, les défenseurs de la Charte de la honte, au premier chef Bernard Drainville, qui en est le ministre responsable, semblent avoir trouvé une nouvelle justification pour leur projet: la lutte à l’intégrisme. M. Drainville prétend désormais que, si on est contre l’intégrisme, on doit être pour la charte, qui serait selon Continue reading
-
Pas trop mal
Radio-Canada rapporte que le Parti libéral du Québec a annoncé sa (nouvelle) position sur les symboles religieux dans la fonction publique. Beaucoup moins répressive que celle du Parti québécois, incarnée dans la Charte de la Honte (que j’ai critiquée à répétition), elle n’en souffre pas moins de certaines incohérences, et n’est pas aussi libérale qu’elle Continue reading
