Religious freedom and 42 USC 666

[ArtSpitzer at aol.com]

Yes, I think what Prof. Laycock says is also true.   And it's probably true 
that if congressional action were needed, a change from 666 to 665a could be 
included in a long list of technical corrections attached to some omnibus bill, 
and no Member would even notice it.   But I'm not sure a court could order 
Congress to do that, while a court could (at least more likely could) order the 
Office of the Law Revision Counsel to make such a change.   But I suppose I'm 
straying from religion and the law.

Art Spitzer

In a message dated 8/1/08 3:35:27 PM, laycockd at umich.edu writes:
> 
> Except that sometimes, I think the drafters do it right in the bill.  If 
> they are amending existing legislation that has already been numbered, and they 
> are inserting new sections, I think that the bill sometimes numbers those 
> sections.  So Section 2 of the bill may amend section 665 of the existing Act 
> and add a new section 666.  I'm pretty sure I've seen examples of this, 
> although I can't swear to it. 
>  If the bill number is created by an Act of Congress, then I suppose it 
> takes another Act of Congress to change it.  Which is why you occasionally see 
> bills to correct typos.
> 




**************
Looking for a car that's sporty, fun and fits in your budget? 
Read reviews on AOL Autos.
      
(http://autos.aol.com/cars-BMW-128-2008/expert-review?ncid=aolaut00050000000017 )
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.ucla.edu/pipermail/religionlaw/attachments/20080801/4cdbd3bf/attachment.htm