Exclusive–Bipartisan Law Profs Warn Jan Brewer: SB1062 'Egregiously Misrepresented'

Breitbart ^ | 25 Feb 2014 | AWR Hawkins

[SoConPubbie]

On February 25th a group of eleven renowned law professors from around the country sent a letter to Arizona Governor Jan Brewer (R) warning that SB1062—the bill "which amends Arizona's Religious Freedom Restoration Act" (RFRA)—has been "egregiously misrepresented by many of its critics." 

The mix of eleven professors consists of Republicans and Democrats, religious and non-religious, "some...[who] oppose same-sex marriage [and] some... who support it." Their letter was obtained exclusively by Breitbart News ahead of its public release.

Their letter focuses on the important role RFRA plays in "[enacting] a uniform standard to be interpreted and applied to individual cases." And the professors said such a "standard makes sense" as "we should not punish people for practicing their religions unless we have very good reason."

SB1062 amends Arizona's RFRA in two ways: 

1. "It provides that people are covered when state or local government requires them to violate their religion in the conduct of their business."

2. "It would provide that people are covered when sued by a private citizen invoking state or local law to demand that they violate their religion."

Countering misrepresentations, the professors pointed out that "SB1062 does not say that businesses can discriminate for religious reasons."

In concluding, they urged Gov. Brewer to be sure SB1062 is "accurately considered," so that in passing judgment on it she is not "misled by uniformed critics." 

The eleven signatories:

Prof. Douglas Laycock, University of Virginia School of Law

Prof. Helen M. Alvare, George Mason University School of Law

Prof. Carl H. Esbeck, University of Missouri School of Law

Prof. Christopher C. Lund, Wayne State University Law School

Prof. Gregory C. Sisk, University of St. Thomas School of Law (Minnesota)

Prof. Mary Ann Glendon, Harvard Law School

Prof. Michael W. McConnell, Stanford Law School

Prof. Thomas C. Berg, University of St. Thomas School of Law (Minnesota)

Prof. Richard W. Garnett, Notre Dame Law School

[SoConPubbie]

	"If we must have an enemy at the head of Government, let it be one whom we can oppose, and for whom we are not responsible, who will not involve our party in the disgrace of his foolish and bad measures." - Alexander Hamilton "We don't intend to turn the Republican Party over to the traitors in the battle just ended. We will have no more of those candidates who are pledged to the same goals as our opposition and who seek our support. Turning the Party over to the so-called moderates wouldn’t make any sense at all." -- President Ronald Reagan "A thing moderately good is not so good as it ought to be. Moderation in temper is always a virtue; but moderation in principle is always a vice." - Thomas Paine 1792 "It does not take a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brushfires of freedom in the minds of men." - Samuel Adams "If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or your arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen." - Samuel Adams

[Iron Munro]

The Homo Mafia seeks total capitualtion.

They don’r want their message clouded by facts.

[11th Commandment]

What bothers me is that this law has to be enacted at ALL. By taking action, this sends the message that Government had the already had right to regulate religious activity.

[Trentamj]

To me, SB1062 exemplifies legislating at its best, that is, it involves constitutionally-elected legislators making law in a constitutional manner which supports, rather than diminishes, citizens' constitutional rights.

[PapaNew]

Individuals and businesses have every right to discriminate however they want. There's nothing wrong with personal discrimination. Discrimination (freedom to choose) is our God-given right.

State laws requiring segregation of blacks from whites are another matter and are unconstitutional (14th Amendment). The feds have a Constitutional right to interfere with state laws that require segregation of blacks form whites.

However, the feds have no other Constitutional authority to interfere with any other form of discrimination on the state level and the feds have no Constitutional authority to interfere with the God given right of individuals and businesses to exercise their freedom of discrimination (freedom to choose) as they see fit.

[VerySadAmerican]

“No shoes. No shirts. No service. Unless you’re gay or muslim.”