Accommodation and fairness to others
VOLOKH at law.ucla.edu
Mon Mar 27 11:33:39 PST 2006
> Thus, courts could, and will, assess "Where will this end?"
> questions. None of which helps to answer your question about
> the deadlines and sabbatarians. On that question, I'm
> curious, Eugene: Assuming arguendo a "substantial burden" on
> religious exercise (and I realize it's a major assumption),
> how would you describe the the compelling state interest in
> *not* giving the sabbatarians an extra day, at least in cases
> where the exemption regime would not be an administrative nightmare?
I'm not sure there would be such a compelling interest. Still,
I take it that one possible candidate is fairness to others: While
having 5 days to do a project may be worse than 6 days, having 6 days
plus a day of rest may be better than 6 days without a day of rest. The
question would then be: Should the fact that the accommodation will
give the claimants a modest benefit compared to others justify denying
the accommodation, given that otherwise the claimants would probably
laber under a substantially greater detriment burden compared to others?
More information about the Religionlaw