Contenuti per la categoria: Corte Suprema degli USA

Familiar crisis and religious jurisdictions the United States: tensions between separatism and pluralism in the ADR system

ABSTRACT: Negli Stati Uniti un ruolo centrale nella risoluzione stragiudiziale delle controversie è svolto dalle confessioni religiose, che prestano servizi di facilitazione della negoziazione, di mediazione e di arbitrato, secondo modelli di crescente complessità procedimentale e vincolatività. Avendo per focus il diritto di famiglia ebraico e musulmano, il contributo illustrerà alcune coordinate dell’atteggiamento ondivago della giurisprudenza secolare, che tenta di mediare tra istanze contrapposte: la sicurezza degli status giuridici, il mantenimento della stabilità sociale e dell’ordine pubblico, la tutela dei diritti dell’individuo, la deflazione del contenzioso civile, la maggiore confidenza dei litiganti verso il ministro di culto in funzione di giudice. La conclusione valuterà l’impatto di queste tendenze sul paradigma interculturale che connota l’ordinamento pluralista americano.

ABSTRACT: In the United States, religious denominations play a central role in the out-of-court resolution of disputes. In fact, religious groups provide negotiation facilitation, mediation and arbitration services, according to models of increasing procedural complexity and binding nature. The contribution will illustrate case law guidelines about law enforcement of Jewish and Islamic judgements in familiar matters. I will focus on attempts of secular courts to mediate between opposing demands: the security of legal statuses, the maintenance of social stability and public order, the protection of rights of the individual, the deflation of civil litigation, the greater confidence of litigants towards the minister of religion acting as judge. In the conclusion, I will evaluate the impact of these trends on the intercultural paradigm that characterizes the American pluralist legal system.

SOMMARIO: 1. Le ADR religiose negli Stati Uniti tra luci e ombre - 2. Pactum suprema lex esto? Il riconoscimento dei lodi arbitrali emessi dai tribunali rabbinici in sede di divorzio - 3. Il diritto familiare musulmano tra ostracismo e neutralità - 4. E pluribus unum? Il molteplice e il singolo di fronte alle giurisdizioni religiose nella società americana

SOMMARIO: 1. Introduzione - 2. Il Primo emendamento e le garanzie gemelle dell’Establishment Clause e del Free Exercise Clause: una panoramica ricostruttiva - 2.1. I tre principali test utilizzati dalla Corte in sede di judicial review e basati sul Primo emendamento: il Lemon test, l’Endorsement test e il Coercion test - 2.2. La recente sentenza Kennedy v. Bremerton School Dist. del 27 luglio 2022: l’abbandono (definitivo) del Lemon test in favore del criterio ermeneutico orientato alla “history and tradition” - 3. Le origini e la mobilitazione politica del motto degli Stati Uniti d’America - 3.1. Il XVIII secolo, la Rivoluzione americana e la diffusione del motto “E Pluribus Unum” - 3.2. Il XIX secolo e la Guerra Civile: la giustapposizione di “In God We Trust” accanto a “E Pluribus Unum” - 3.3. Il XX secolo e la Guerra fredda: “In God We Trust” diventa (l’unico) motto nazionale - 3.4. I diversi usi del motto nazionale lungo il dispiegarsi della storia - 4. Le caratteristiche dell’American civil religion e le sue ambivalenze - 5. Il motto nazionale in alcuni significativi obiter della Corte suprema: il deismo cerimoniale e le sue critiche - 5.1. Il deismo cerimoniale in alcune pronunce della Corte suprema - 5.2. Le riflessioni (preoccupate) della dottrina - 6. Riflessioni conclusive e spunti di comparazione - 6.1. L’uso della storia e della cultura nell’ordinamento italiano: cenni di comparazione sull’insegnamento della religione cattolica e sull’esposizione del crocifisso a scuola - 6.2. L’altro verso dell’American civil religion: ideologia e populismo.

The U.S. motto "In God We Trust" in light of the history and tradition “of the First Amendment

ABSTRACT: This essay reflects upon the U.S. national motto “In God We Trust” and religious liberty. It describes the birth and the life of the U.S. national motto from an historical and a normative perspective, and in relation with three crucial events that forged the United States’ historical conscience: the American Revolution, the Civil War, and the Cold War. It highlights how the motto has embraced different purposes and meanings, as well as attained varying levels of religiosity. After having introduced the main features of American civil religion, the paper pays attention to the various obiter that the Supreme Court has offered about the constitutionality of this symbol. The conclusions focus on two aspects: a brief comparison with the Italian legal system, which underlines the existing similarities between the “history and tradition” argument fostered by the U.S. Supreme Court and the appeal to the “historical heritage” and the “religious culture” that can be found in the Italian legal and political debates on the display of the crucifix in the classroom and the teaching of the Catholic religion. Secondly, they reflect about the ideological and illiberal turn that the American civil religion may take.

TABLE OF CONTENTS: 1. Premise - 2. Italy: the relevance of the possibility of satisfying religious feeling through the alternatives offered by computer tools - 3. Germany: the non-belonging of the public exercise of worship to the Wesensgehalt of the right to religious freedom - 4. France: the suspension of religious ceremonies as a “serious and manifestly unlawful interference” with religious freedom - 5. United States of America: the participation in religious services as the “heart of the First Amendment’s guarantee of religious liberty” - 6. Concluding remarks.

ABSTRACT: The purpose of this paper is to examine the position and the scope of the right to religious freedom in the case law of the national courts of some European and non-European countries, which are called upon to establish the legitimacy or otherwise of the balancing realized by the emergency regulation against Covid-19 between this interest and the equally important one of health. Such evaluations, essentially conducted by the judges using the principle of proportionality (as well as that of reasonableness), betray, in fact, in the phase of verification of the adequacy of the measure (so-called Verhälntismäßigkeit im engeren Sinne) the identification of the sphere of intangibility within the right, removed from further balancing. The systems taken into consideration for this purpose are the Italian, German, French and American ones, identified as significant expressions of different regimes of relations between the State and religious denominations, and, therefore, tending to a different overall attitude of the State towards religious experience.

SOMMARIO: 1. Introduzione - 2. “Breve durata” delle restrizioni e proporzio-nalità: l’interpretazione del Bundesverfassungsgericht - 3. Il Consiglio di Stato francese e la “question de proportionnalité” della libertà di culto - 4. “Secular gatherings” v. “secular businesses”: il tertium comparationis nella giurisprudenza della Corte Suprema statunitense - 5. Emergenza sanitaria e test di proporzionalità nella giurisprudenza di Strasburgo: brevi considerazioni de iure condendo - 6. Conclusioni.

Restrictions on Religious Freedom and the Principle of Proportionalitybefore the Courts: A Comparative Perspective

ABSTRACT: The emergency legislation through which the legal systems have tried to cope with the Covid-19 pandemic has necessitated new forms of balancing health protection and other fundamental freedoms, including freedom of religion. The aim of this paper is to analyse the different ways in which the superior Courts have applied the principle of proportionality, with the purpose of trying to assess the extent to which the different sensitivity of judges (especially as regards the identification of the tertium comparationis) has affected the effective protection of freedom of religion during the pandemic. In particular, a comparison will be made among the statements of the Bundesverfassungsgericht, the Conseil d'État and the US Supreme Court, which have balanced the right to health and religious freedom. Short concluding remarks will be addressed to the possible role of Strasbourg jurisprudence in guiding the work of national judges dealing with the proportionality test, also in a post-pandemic perspective.

SOMMARIO: 1. Una sentenza attesa: Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization - 2. Motivazioni offensive e preoccupanti - 3. Una decisione all’insegna del principio democratico e della chiarezza normativa? - 4. Questioni spinose - 5. Dobbs, ovvero la morte del potere di judicial review della SCOTUS?

Dobbs: the alarming implications of a political overturning of the right to abortion

ABSTRACT: With Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization the Supreme Court of United States overturned Roe v. Wade, upending almost 50 years of abortion rights in the United States. In commenting the case this article highlights the many problems arising from the decision: its bringing about new divisive legal issues; its possible outreach in terms of other fundamental liberties that could soon be cancelled; and especially the decline of the Supreme Court legitimacy that could call into question its very judicial review power.
 

 SOMMARIO: 1. Considerazioni introduttive - 2. I casi di rifiuto opposto da pasticcieri per motivi religiosi di vendere torte commissionate da clienti omosessuali - 3. Libertà di contrarre e interessi contrapposti - 4. L’attuale assetto del quadro normativo in materia di diritto contrattuale antidiscriminatorio - 5. I tentativi della dottrina civilistica di ricondurre la materia all’interno di una cornice di coerenza sistematica - 6. Una inedita rappresentazione in ambito europeo del difficile equilibrio tra libertà di espressione e divieto di discriminazione a causa dell’orientamento sessuale - 7. Dalla libertà di espressione alla libertà di creazione “artistica” il passo è breve? - 8. La decisione di inammissibilità del ricorso presentato davanti alla Corte di Strasburgo dall’attivista di QueerSpace.

“The Icing on the Cake”. Looking for the Right Balance between the Baker’s Freedom and the Prohibition of Discrimination of the Same-Sex Couples

ABSTRACT: When a baker refuses to sell a cake for the wedding of a homosexual couple on religious grounds, a conflict arises between two fundamental rights, equality, and freedom of religion. In some cases, freedom of expression may also be involved. This article examines the question of whether these rights can be balanced, considering the doctrinal approach to anti-discrimination contract law and the most recent case law.

SOMMARIO: 1. La questione dell’aborto e la perdita di credibilità della Corte Suprema statunitense - 2. Una tempesta perfetta? - 3. La partita della fiducia.

The case of abortion: a slippery slope for SCOTUS?

ABSTRACT: The case of the right of abortion in the United States is going to represent much more than a mere legal question. The upcoming decision of the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) on the matter involves its own credibility as a third party institution in a check and balance system where the SCOTUS is increasingly perceived as a political player. In this paper the A. tries to explore why it is so.

SOMMARIO: 1. Introduzione - 2. La religious accommodation in Europa - 3. (segue) Gli sviluppi più recenti - 4. Il ruolo della giurisprudenza europea: primi segnali di apertura all’accomodamento religioso - 5. Il know-how statunitense e canadese: modelli giurisprudenziali a confronto e possibili interazioni - 6. La religious accommodation in Europa: una prospettiva de iure condendo.

The European frontiers of religious accommodation. Starting points for comparison

ABSTRACT: In the last years several scholars pointed out the desirability to extend the accommodation beyond disability. Currently, indeed, a duty of reasonable accommodation is exclusively provided in favour of people with disabilities (art. 5 dir. 2000/78/CE). Previous contributions, however, have stressed how the existing lack of a provision on religious accommodation can result not only in a low level of protection of religious freedom, but also in the rise of a hierarchy related to discrimination grounds in which religion and belief seem to be left at the bottom. Recently, also the European Courts (especially the ECtHR) have apparently open to the extension of the concept of reasonable accommodation, in line with the sensitivity of the Supreme Courts of USA and Canada, where the religious accommodation was first stated. Moving from the comparison between the American and Canadian jurisprudences and the European one, this paper argues about the transposability of the religious accommodation in Europe, in order to strengthen, even in the workplace, the protection of the freedom of religion.

SOMMARIO: 1. Introduzione - 2. Il frammentato quadro normativo in materia di LGBT rights - 3. Il caso Bostock v. Clayton County, Georgia - 4. L’impatto della pronunzia Bostock sulle istituzioni religiose - 5. La tutela offerta dal Title VII all’esercizio della libertà religiosa - 6. La Section 702(a) del Title VII e le questioni interpretative irrisolte - 7. Nuove letture giurisprudenziali della Section 702(a) - 8. L’interazione fra esenzioni religiose ex Section 702(a) e sex discrimination: possibili futuri scenari alla luce del caso Bostock - 9. La specificità delle istituzioni impegnate nel settore dell’istruzione - 10. La ministerial exception e i limiti della sua applicabilità - 11. Il RFRA - 12. I rischi derivanti da un utilizzo over-expansive del RFRA - 13. La Free Exercise Clause - 14. Le vie percorribili per recepire nuove prospettive valoriali - 15. Il mancato intervento del Congresso - 16. Principio di non discriminazione ed esercizio della libertà religiosa: un binomio incompatibile? - 17. L’esempio della legislazione sui same-sex marriages - 18. La tutela dell’istituzionalismo religioso e i suoi “ragionevoli” limiti - 19. Conclusioni.

The interplay between religious exemptions and LGBT rights in the workplace: new judicial trajectories at the crossroads of plural narratives

ABSTRACT: A recent U.S. Supreme Court judgement found that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act covers discriminations founded on gender identity and sexual orientation. The present paper analyses the effect of this judgement on the exercise of religious freedom of faith-based organizations and investigates the possibility of finding ways to reconcile competing interests.

SOMMARIO: 1. L’intervento della Suprema Corte federale americana in tema di compatibilità della normativa emergenziale con la Free Exercise Clause - 2. I termini della questione originariamente sollevata e la pronunzia del giudice di primo grado - 3. L’appello dinanzi alla Corte del Nono Circuito e l’opinione dissenziente del giudice Collins - 4. Il problema della costituzionalità delle misure restrittive incidenti sulla libertà di culto nei contrapposti orientamenti seguiti dalle Corti inferiori - 5. Gli argomenti posti a fondamento del ricorso alla Corte Suprema - 6. La contrapposizione tra judicial deference e lettura rigorosamente neutrale dei termini della vicenda portata all’esame dei giudici - 7. Una riproposizione dei canoni di stretta neutralità anche nell’interpretazione dei principi costituzionali in materia religiosa? - 8. Notazioni conclusive.

Anti-Covid Law vs. Free Exercise Clause in US Supreme Court Case Law: is it a Return to the Doctrine of “Neutrality” in the Interpretation of Religious Clauses of the First Amendment?

ABSTRACT: The paper analyzes the question of wheter the Stay-at-Home Order and the Reopening Plan that were issued by the State of California to combat the Covid-19 pandemic discriminate against places of worship in violation of the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. In South Bay United Pentecostal Church vs. Newsom, the Supreme Court of the United States upholds California’s guidelines for places of worship that limit religious worship services to 25% of a building’s capacity or a maximum of 100 attendees, because similar restrictions apply to comparable secular gatherings.