Landmark First Amendment Religion Litigation?

[Volokh, Eugene]

    The citation was just to Roberts v. Jaycees, and there was no
attached footnoet.


________________________________

	From: religionlaw-bounces at lists.ucla.edu
[mailto:religionlaw-bounces at lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of
Lawyer2974 at aol.com
	Sent: Friday, January 26, 2007 3:02 PM
	To: religionlaw at lists.ucla.edu
	Subject: Re: Landmark First Amendment Religion Litigation?
	
	
	In a message dated 1/26/2007 5:53:14 PM Eastern Standard Time,
VOLOKH at law.ucla.edu writes:

		In the hybrid rights section, Scalia wrote, "And it is
easy to
		envision a case in which a challenge on freedom of
association grounds
		would likewise be reinforced by Free Exercise Clause
concerns."  I
		wouldn't exactly call this express, but it does seem
designed to leave
		open room precisely for the ministerial exception.
		
		    Eugene

	Unfortunately I am working form memory at the moment but that
memory is that it was precisely in this section that footnotes included
some of the ministerial exception case(s)
	 
	Donald C. Clark, Jr.
	2333 Waukegan Road
	Suite 160
	Bannockburn, Illinois 60015
	847-236-0900
	847-236-0909 (fax)
	
	

	This message is a PRIVATE communication. This message and all
attachments
	are a private communication sent by a law firm and may be
confidential or
	protected by privilege. If you are not the intended recipient,
you are
	hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution or
use of the
	information contained in or attached to this message is strictly
	prohibited.  Please notify the sender of the delivery error by
replying to
	this message, and then delete it from your system.  Thank you.
	

	
	
************************************************************************
********************************
	

	IRS Circular 230 Disclosure:  To comply with requirements
imposed by the
	IRS, we inform you that any U.S. federal tax advice contained
herein
	(including any attachments), unless specifically stated
otherwise, is not
	intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the
purposes of (i)
	avoiding penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or (ii)
promoting,
	marketing or recommending to another party any transaction or
matter
	herein.
	

	
	

	

	

	

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.ucla.edu/pipermail/religionlaw/attachments/20070126/7ad75608/attachment.html