I got an email from Walter Olson of the Cato Institute, who passed along links to his work on the Kim Davis controversy. I thought they would be of interest to many of my readers, so I'm happy to pass it along:
The Kim Davis story has focused public attention on the issue of religious accommodation, especially in the workplace, and I have written four (!) new pieces on that subject two of them just out today.First, if you haven't seen it, here's my Cato post from last Friday on the Kim Davis case itself:
I've got two pieces out today taking off in various directions from the Kentucky controversy. The longer one, just out at Newsweek, is an extended critique of the misnamed First Amendment Defense Act (FADA), a social-conservative priority that purports to shield believers in traditional marriage from any government discrimination whatsoever. It has been endorsed by Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio, and (incredibly) the RNC. Examine its provisions closely and you'll find it's really bad:Also today at Politico Europe, my piece on why the EEOC case of a Muslim flight attendant who doesn't want to serve alcohol ("scruples about screwpulls") does not legally have much in common with the Kim Davis case."Here’s the thing: The EEOC has *already* sided with Muslim employees who wish to avoid handling alcohol....If Charee Stanley or a future counterpart someday wins the right to bob and weave through the passenger cabin, handing out only beverages that meet with her spiritual approval, she’ll have this record of Congressional posturing to thank."
