WHY HOBBY LOBBY DECISION IS SO WRONG


Reagan-Appointed Judge Cites Hobby Lobby Ruling to Decide Polygamist Sect Doesn’t Have to Testify about Child Labor Violations


From AllGov
September 2014

When the U.S. Supreme Court elevated the importance of religious freedom in the Hobby Lobbycase, it made it possible for a member of a fringe religious sect to avoid helping the federal government investigate child labor allegations.
Citing the precedence established in Burwell v. Hobby Lobby, which allows businesses to cite religious objections in not providing birth control to workers through company health insurance plans, U.S. District Judge David Sam in Utah has ruled that a member of a polygamist group can cite religious freedom as a reason to not give testimony in a criminal probe.
Warren Jeffs, the leader of the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (FLDS), an offshoot of the mainstream Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, has been in trouble with law enforcement for years. He’s now serving a life sentence in prison for sexually assaulting two under-age girls he had taken as wives.
Now his church is the focus of a federal labor investigation. Jeffs was accused in a CNN report of ordering that children be taken out of school to help pick pecans at a private orchard. The government wanted FLDS member Vergel Steed, who has worked at the school, to testify about this practice.
That effort hit a roadblock when Sam, who was appointed to the federal bench by President Ronald Reagan, ruled Steed could refuse to talk about FLDS business based on his religious oath to not discuss internal matters.
“Before Hobby Lobby, it’s unlikely that Steed’s claim would prevail. Although a federal law offers fairly robust protections for religious liberty, this law only applies when the federal government ‘substantially burden[s] a person’s exercise of religion,’” Ian Millhiser wrote for ThinkProgress.
Sam ruled “Petitioner has failed to show that forcing Mr. Steed to answer the questions offensive to his sincerely held religious beliefs is the least restrictive means to advance any compelling interest it may have,” and suggested other avenues for the government to pursue.
-Noel Brinkerhoff
To Learn More:

Recall that this case is about a labor dispute with possible criminal implications but it involves a religious organization.    


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

REAL LIFE STORY OR REAL LIFE HOAX?

INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS: THE TRUMP/PUTIN LOVE CHRONCILES

SHE SHOWED HIM HERS, HE SHOWED HER HIS. AND HE GOT BUSTED!