I don't think the walk is so short from enacted law to state actions. And the words on Dini's webpage do not appear facially neutral - in fact they seem facially specific because they narrow to deny recommendation - indeed, to besmirch - anyone whose "cherished beliefs" conflict with human evolution.
Perhaps the lesson to this story is that a university's legal counsel ought to review all public policy statements in advance.
I've got a chocolate bet going with Nebullis, so why don't you and I do the seafood? That way, when I win, I can have dessert with my lobster!
Historically speaking, it's not far at all.
And the words on Dini's webpage do not appear facially neutral - in fact they seem facially specific because they narrow to deny recommendation - indeed, to besmirch - anyone whose "cherished beliefs" conflict with human evolution.
Ah. But because they single out no specific creed or sect, and apply to everyone equally, they are facially neutral, even though the burden may appear to fall most heavily on certain varieties of fundamentalist Christianity - this is precisely analogous to holding laws criminalizing peyote use, without also carving out a religious exception, as Constitutionally permissible, even though the burden appears to fall most heavily on certain Native American sects. Because neither that law nor Dini's actions formally target a particular religion or sect - there is no suggestion anywhere that he only requires this affirmation of students who belong to some particular religious persuasion - they are permissible by the logic of Smith.
As the reasoning in Smith (and Rehnquist's dissent in Thomas) goes, the fact that a law creates some burden upon a religious group does not mean that the legislature or the courts must carve out exceptions for those religious groups, if that law is neutral on its face. The state may create such exceptions, if it so desires - it is not required to create such exceptions, however. Dini could, by this logic, create an exemption to his requirements for fundamentalist Christians, if he so wished, but he is not required to provide such an exemption.
Perhaps the lesson to this story is that a university's legal counsel ought to review all public policy statements in advance.
Wouldn't help in this case. This is Dini's policy, not the university's. The university apparently has no formal institutional policy on letters of recommendation, preferring to leave such things to the discretion of individual professors. Which I strongly suspect is also the case at virtually every institution of higher learning in this country - I would be very surprised if you find even a single college or university that has a formal, campus-wide policy regarding the circumstances in which letters of recommendation can or should (or should not) be issued by faculty.
I've got a chocolate bet going with Nebullis, so why don't you and I do the seafood? That way, when I win, I can have dessert with my lobster!
I admire your confidence, anyway. It's a deal ;)