Nevada district court applies Fraternal Order of Police v. Newark (3d Cir.), holds no-beard policy must pass strict scrutiny

[Douglas Laycock]

William Penn was famously jailed in the 17th century for refusing to remove his hat in court.  This became an infamous incident in the colonies; Maryland and I think one other colony passed exemption laws specifically protecting the refusal to remove one's hat.  We have progressed in some ways, and regressed a long ways in others. 

Quoting "Volokh, Eugene" <VOLOKH at law.ucla.edu>:

>     Riback v. Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Dep't, 2008 WL 3211279 (D.
> Nev. 2008).  The court concludes, though, that the headgear regulation
> (which required the removal of all hats when entering any building, when
> not in uniform) isn't subject to strict scrutiny because "the regulation
> does not provide individualized exemptions for any reason, secular or
> religious."
> _______________________________________________
> To post, send message to Religionlaw at lists.ucla.edu
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see 
> http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw[1]
>
> Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as 
> private.  Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are 
> posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can 
> (rightly or wrongly) forward the messages to others.
>
>
>

Douglas Laycock
Yale Kamisar Collegiate Professor of Law
University of Michigan Law School
625 S. State St.
Ann Arbor, MI  48109-1215
  734-647-9713

Links:
------
[1] http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.ucla.edu/pipermail/religionlaw/attachments/20080813/93f0278c/attachment.htm