By Michael Peabody – Parties to these kinds of disputes should be well-served if they cooperatively seek solutions by identifying and respecting those specific personal areas which are non-negotiable and cordoning them off, while respecting the freedom of the areas in between where both sides must intersect. Identifying and preserving these areas of respect and finding opportunities for accommodation is not an easy process in today’s ideologically divided world, but the results will be much more profitable for both sides than engaging in perpetual conflict in the public arena. At the same time, the religious rights of the participants on both sides to belief and practice would be honored and protected.
The United States Supreme Court has scheduled oral arguments on the Hobby Lobby case for March 25, 2014. According to SCOTUSBlog, the issue is: "Whether the [RFRA], which provides that the government 'shall not substantially burden a person's exercise of religion' unless that burden is the least restrictive means to further a compelling governmental interest, allows a for-profit corporation to […]
By Stephen N. Allred – Ultimately, 2013 was a rough year for Christians in many parts of the world who were harassed, raped, murdered and persecuted on account of their faith. In comparison, American Christians, though they faced some challenges, fared rather well.
By Robert J. Ray – Realistically, can a government allow every employer to customize the rules without descending into administrative chaos? Justice Antonin Scalia argued in Oregon v. Smith that one’s religious beliefs don’t negate the need to comply with valid laws.
On the other hand, freedom of religion is a crucial principle that must be defended. But how far?
Washington state law prohibits employers from discriminating against employees in compensation or terms or conditions of employment because of age, sex, marital status, sexual orientation, race, creed, color, national origin, veteran status, or disability. This case raises the issue of whether a failure to make reasonable accommodation for an employee's sincere religious beliefs is implied in the statute.
The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission filed suit on September 23 against Consol Energy on behalf of a Christian who refused to sign into work using a biometric hand scanner
Yesterday, the New Mexico Supreme Court ruled that the First Amendment does not protect a photographer’s decision not to photograph a same-sex commitment ceremony even if it would violate the photographer’s deeply held religious beliefs.
By Michael Peabody – On Monday, June 24, 2013 the U.S. Supreme Court issued two 5-4 decisions that will make it more difficult for plaintiffs to prove that their employers violated Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Title VII is the federal law designed to protect employees from discrimination on the basis of factors such as race, sex, and religion.
Students at Stanford University School of Law have a unique opportunity to participate in the nation’s only law-school based clinic program that focuses on issues regarding religious freedom and accommodation.
On Friday, March 22, Kentucky Governor Steve Beshear (D) vetoed a religious freedom Bill (HB 279) claiming that the bill would “cause serious unintentional consequences that could threaten public safety, health care, and individuals’ civil rights.” The legislature is expected to override the veto.