Address by Judge Jed S. Rakoff
On August 18, 2019, my friend and long-ago law partner, Judge Jed S. Rakoff, gave an address at the Touro Synagogue in Newport, Rhode Island at the… Read More »Address by Judge Jed S. Rakoff
Religious Freedom
Special Bulletin. Kim Davis and the GOP.
We had not intended to post anything about Kim Davis, the Kentucky County Clerk now in jail for defying a court order to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples. Earlier, Ms. Davis had declined an offer of release on a condition of non-interference with her Deputy Clerks, but licenses are now being issued by her Deputies without her sanction. Although Lyle Denniston, a respected commentator for Scotusblog, has noted that the validity of such licenses could be questioned, we doubt that they will be successfully challenged. In the meantime, The New York Times reported on Friday that Davis was continuing to stand her ground, and that Kentucky politicians were pondering possible legislative solutions. One way or another, it is inevitable that, at some point, the embarrassing controversy will be resolved with same-sex couples continuing to be issued licenses, and the matter will mercifully disappear from the front pages.Read More »Special Bulletin. Kim Davis and the GOP.
Blog 64. Jeb Bush: Israel and Indiana
Although we have indicated our tentative support for Jeb Bush to be the Republican nominee, it is still early days: Bush has yet to articulate his position on several major issues and the dynamics of the primary campaign, including the debates among the candidates – sometimes entertaining and sometimes dismaying – lie well down the road. We are in agreement with Bush on the two issues with which he has been most clearly identified and most sharply criticized from the right – immigration reform and Common Core. More generally, we have favored Bush for reasons suggested in a March 30 New York Times analysis, “Jeb Bush and Scott Walker Point G.O.P. To Contrary Paths.” A principal point was Bush’s distaste for paralyzing polarization:Read More »Blog 64. Jeb Bush: Israel and Indiana
Blog No. 42. Contraceptive Confusion: The Puzzlements of Hobby Lobby and Wheaton
On June 30, The Supreme Court issued an opinion in Sebelius v. Hobby Lobby Stores and Conestoga Wood Specialties v. Sebelius (collectively Hobby Lobby) invalidating regulations under the Affordable Care Act (ACA) that require that insurance provided by employers cover a broad range of contraceptive medications and devices. The employers in each case objected to coverage for four specific types of contraceptives that they consider to be abortifacients, i.e., causing an abortion. The employers claimed that the requirement to provide that coverage infringed their rights under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA). A five-justice majority of the Court agreed in an opinion by Justice Alito. The immediate controversy over the decision was quickly heightened when, three days later,the Court entered a preliminary stay in Wheaton College v. Burwell relieving Wheaton, a Christian college, of complying with an alternative procedure that the Court had appeared to endorse in Hobby Lobby.Read More »Blog No. 42. Contraceptive Confusion: The Puzzlements of Hobby Lobby and Wheaton
Blog No. 22. Obamacare and Contraception: Science, Freedom of Religion and Politics
The Supreme Court has agreed to hear two cases challenging the requirement of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) that insurance plans provided by employers must include coverage for certain contraceptive drugs and devices. Circuit courts hade reached conflicting decisions as to whether that requirement infringes the rights of corporate employers or their stockholders under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA), and the Court will resolve that conflict. The cases raise interesting legal questions and, like most of the more interesting cases in the Supreme Court, they have stimulated political reactions of which more no doubt lie ahead. RINOcracy.com will not predict how the Court will rule, or even take a firm position as to how it should, but will merely attempt to clarify the issues. As a political issue, however, we will suggest that the cases probably represent more of a risk than an opportunity for Republicans and that they should treat the Court’s eventual decision with some caution.Read More »Blog No. 22. Obamacare and Contraception: Science, Freedom of Religion and Politics