Priests Barred (by ArchBishop's Directive) Barred from Donating toCandidates (from Electionlaw list)

[Volokh, Eugene]

I should note that some states prohibit employers from restricting their
employees' off-duty political activities.  California Labor Code sec.
1101, for instance, provides, "No employer shall make, adopt, or enforce
any rule, regulation, or policy ... [f]orbidding or preventing employees
from engaging or participating in politics ...."  Naturally, a church
might raise a First Amendment objection of some sort to this, and if the
law is seen as substantially burdening the church's own First Amendment
rights, it might be found to be inapplicable to the church; see the
Washington Supreme Court's Nelson v. McClatchy Newspapers case, which
held that a newspaper could enforce a no-political-activity policy for
its reporters notwithstanding a similar state law.  The question would
be, I take it, whether the law does indeed sufficiently burden the
church's autonomy or expressive association.
 
Eugene


________________________________

	From: religionlaw-bounces at lists.ucla.edu
[mailto:religionlaw-bounces at lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of Scarberry, Mark
	Sent: Saturday, June 28, 2008 3:29 PM
	To: Election Law; Religionlaw at lists.ucla.edu
	Subject: Priests Barred (by ArchBishop's Directive) Barred from
Donating toCandidates (from Electionlaw list)
	
	
	It seems the basis for Denver Archbishop Bishop Chaput's
upcoming directive that priests not donate is that by donating they are
endorsing a candidate, which is prohibited by a US Conference of
Catholic Bishops document. Campaign contribution disclosure rules turn a
private donation into a public statement/public endorsement, and thus
they work to prevent donations by persons who must, for religious
reasons, donate nonpublicly or not at all. Any possibility that a priest
who honestly believes his faith requires him to provide financial
support for a (pro-life, or an anti-death penalty, or a pro-social
justice) candidate could succeed with a RFRA claim that the federal
disclosure law burdens his free exercise of religion? Is there a serious
possibility that such nondisclosed donations by priests would cause
corruption? Maybe in light of the priest sex abuse scandals (not
necessarily more prevalent for priests than for others but certainly
more publicized), and in light of other interests that clergy may have
(tax laws, etc.), there could be a concern about influence buying, but
clergy seem an unlikely group to have the personal wealth necessary to
succeed. 
	 
	Mark Scarberry
	Pepperdine

________________________________

	From: election-law-bounces at mailman.lls.edu on behalf of Rick
Hasen
	Sent: Sat 6/28/2008 1:35 PM
	To: Election Law
	Subject: [EL] Electionlawblog news and commentary 6/28/08
	
	

	June 28, 2008 

	[snip]
	 
	"Priests barred from donations to candidates"

	AP offers this report
<http://www.denverpost.com/technology/ci_9729942>  from Colorado.
	

	Posted by Rick Hasen at 01:27 PM
<http://electionlawblog.org/archives/011100.html>  
	
	 
	[snip] 

	-- 
	Rick Hasen
	William H. Hannon Distinguished Professor of Law
	Loyola Law School
	919 Albany Street
	Los Angeles, CA  90015-1211
	(213)736-1466
	(213)380-3769 - fax
	rick.hasen at lls.edu
	http://www.lls.edu/academics/faculty/hasen.html
	http://electionlawblog.org <http://electionlawblog.org/> 
	

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.ucla.edu/pipermail/religionlaw/attachments/20080628/6b549e87/attachment.htm