Just to add to this-- Hobby Lobby demonstrated that this Court is not against

Sign up, and you'll be able to customize your font size and more! Sign up

Report problem with this ad

Jun 23, 2017
12:21:28pm

Quacker Walk-on

Just to add to this-- Hobby Lobby demonstrated that this Court is not against

"exemptions." If they were, they could/would have struck down RFRA as an establishment clause violation in that case or well before.

This message has been modified

Originally posted on Jun 23, 2017 at 12:21:28pm

Message modified by Quacker on Jun 23, 2017 at 12:21:50pm

Report problem with this ad

Quacker

Bio page: Quacker
Joined: Jun 2, 2017
Last login: Aug 18, 2017
Total posts: 253 (0 FO)

Report problem with this ad

Messages

Author

Time

Lawyers: Something interesting to consider about the TX law and CA prohibition

(Private)

6/23/17 11:06am

It is fun to watch CA standing behind their 'principles'

fan_byu

6/23/17 11:15am

Just like the PAC 12 didn't want a religious institution - unless it was one

crack

6/23/17 11:18am

For a state that doesn't want to moralize in codified law, they sure do a lot.

6/23/17 11:21am

I also think that it could lose of Dormant Commerce grounds.

ironman1315

6/23/17 11:29am

There is no way this is an establishment clause problem

Quacker

6/23/17 12:16pm

Just to add to this-- Hobby Lobby demonstrated that this Court is not against

Quacker

6/23/17 12:21pm

I am not familiar with the TX law.

(Private)

6/23/17 2:41pm

Report problem with this ad

Posting on CougarBoard

In order to post, you will need to either sign up or log in.

Report problem with this ad