Block, SkipCaptcha, nsAm_Govt_101RO, nsAm_Govt_101RW, nsAm_Govt_101_ta, nsTeam2RO, nsTeam2RW, nsTeam2_talkRO, nsTeam2_talkRW
5,655
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 29:
Line 29: + + + + + +
no edit summary
===Establishment Clause===
===Establishment Clause===
'''Hankins v. Lyght, 441 F.3d 96 (2006)''' "In an age discrimination challenge by a Methodist clergyman, Judge Winter writing for the majority held that [the Religious Freedom and Restoration Act (RFRA)] is properly applied to an Age Discrimination in Employment Act claim. Judge Sotomayor dissented contending that RFRA does not apply to disputes between private parties and that the ADEA does not govern disputes between religious entities and their spiritual leaders." <ref>http://religionclause.blogspot.com/2009/05/sotomayor-is-high-court-pick-here-are.html</ref>
Sotomayor stated, "The majority's opinion thus violates a cardinal principle of '''judicial restraint''' by reaching unnecessarily the question of RFRA's constitutionality. For these reasons, I respectfully dissent." (emphasis added)
"I believe that a remand is a wasteful expenditure of judicial resources and an unnecessary and uninvited burden on the parties. The district court is in no better position than we are to decide either the statutory or constitutional questions presented in this case. In my view, the most appropriate disposition of this case would be to affirm the district court's dismissal of appellant's claims on the ground that the ADEA does not apply to employment suits brought against religious institutions by their spiritual leaders. Because the majority's contrary approach disregards a clear and voluntary waiver, conflicts with RFRA's text and with binding precedent, and unnecessarily resolves a contested constitutional question, I respectfully dissent."
===Free Speech===
===Free Speech===