Meriwether Case of Administration Persecution - Revision history

Erasmuse: /* Summary */

2021-03-31T04:35:50Z

‎Summary

Erasmuse: /* Summary */

2021-03-31T04:27:31Z

‎Summary

Erasmuse: /* Case Details: Title, People, Numbers */

2021-03-31T04:21:45Z

‎Case Details: Title, People, Numbers

Erasmuse: /* Case Details: Title, People, Numbers */

2021-03-31T04:18:38Z

‎Case Details: Title, People, Numbers

Erasmuse: /* Access Data */

2021-03-31T04:18:19Z

‎Access Data

Erasmuse: /* Free Exercise of Religion (my boldface) */

2021-03-31T04:17:30Z

‎Free Exercise of Religion (my boldface)

Erasmuse: /* Free Exercise of Religion */

2021-03-31T04:17:07Z

‎Free Exercise of Religion

Erasmuse at 04:14, 31 March 2021

2021-03-31T04:14:58Z

Erasmuse: /* Summary */

2021-03-31T04:10:30Z

‎Summary

Erasmuse: /* Summary */

2021-03-31T04:09:42Z

‎Summary

← Older revision		Revision as of 04:35, 31 March 2021
Line 23:		Line 23:
	Meriwether appealed everything except for dismissal of his equal protection claim, and won on everything except Due Process 3-0 in the Sixth Circuit, which remanded the case to Judge Dlott. [https://adfmedialegalfiles.blob.core.windows.net/files/Meriwether6thCircuitOpinion.pdf The Sixth Circuit said] the university violated his free speech and free exercise rights were violated if the facts were as he alleged them, but declined to find a violation of due process for vagueness given how clear the university's orders had been made to him.		Meriwether appealed everything except for dismissal of his equal protection claim, and won on everything except Due Process 3-0 in the Sixth Circuit, which remanded the case to Judge Dlott. [https://adfmedialegalfiles.blob.core.windows.net/files/Meriwether6thCircuitOpinion.pdf The Sixth Circuit said] the university violated his free speech and free exercise rights were violated if the facts were as he alleged them, but declined to find a violation of due process for vagueness given how clear the university's orders had been made to him.

−	The appellate decision, the big document, is not only decisive, but clear and well written (except that he uses "''id.''"). See https://adfmedialegalfiles.blob.core.windows.net/files/Meriwether6thCircuitOpinion.pdf.

		+	The appellate decision, by Judge Anul Roger Thapar, which is the big document, is not only decisive, but clear and well written (except that he uses "id."). See https://adfmedialegalfiles.blob.core.windows.net/files/Meriwether6thCircuitOpinion.pdf. Thapar is quite a famous judge, the kind that is on Supreme Court short-lists.

	<!-- ******************************************************************************************************************-->		<!-- ******************************************************************************************************************-->

← Older revision		Revision as of 04:27, 31 March 2021
Line 23:		Line 23:
	Meriwether appealed everything except for dismissal of his equal protection claim, and won on everything except Due Process 3-0 in the Sixth Circuit, which remanded the case to Judge Dlott. [https://adfmedialegalfiles.blob.core.windows.net/files/Meriwether6thCircuitOpinion.pdf The Sixth Circuit said] the university violated his free speech and free exercise rights were violated if the facts were as he alleged them, but declined to find a violation of due process for vagueness given how clear the university's orders had been made to him.		Meriwether appealed everything except for dismissal of his equal protection claim, and won on everything except Due Process 3-0 in the Sixth Circuit, which remanded the case to Judge Dlott. [https://adfmedialegalfiles.blob.core.windows.net/files/Meriwether6thCircuitOpinion.pdf The Sixth Circuit said] the university violated his free speech and free exercise rights were violated if the facts were as he alleged them, but declined to find a violation of due process for vagueness given how clear the university's orders had been made to him.

−	The appellate decision, the big document, is not only decisive, but clear and well written (except that he uses "''id.''"). See https://adfmedialegalfiles.blob.core.windows.net/files/Meriwether6thCircuitOpinion.pdf. ~~There are two distinct reasons Meriwether won: (a) Free Speech, and (b) Free Exercise of Religion.~~	+	The appellate decision, the big document, is not only decisive, but clear and well written (except that he uses "''id.''"). See https://adfmedialegalfiles.blob.core.windows.net/files/Meriwether6thCircuitOpinion.pdf.

@@ Line 3: / Line 3: @@
 *[https://adfmedialegalfiles.blob.core.windows.net/files/Meriwether6thCircuitOpinion.pdf. NICHOLAS K. MERIWETHER v. FRANCESCA HARTOP et al.], with JANE DOE; SEXUALITY AND GENDER ACCEPTANCE as Intervenors-Appellees.<br>
 *Alliance for Defending Freedom's Travis C. Barham and others for Meriwether.  D.C. Jenner and Block partner [https://jenner.com/people/AdamUnikowsky Adam G. Unikowsky] for Intervenors. Notre Dame Prof. [https://law.nd.edu/directory/gerard-bradley/ Gerard V. Bradley] for an amicus. Lots of amici.
-*No. 1:18-cv-00753—Susan J. Dlott, District Judge.
+*No. 1:18-cv-00753— [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Susan_J._Dlott#Personal_life Susan J. Dlott], District Judge.
 *Argued: November 19, 2020.  Decided and Filed: March 26, 2021.
-*Before: McKEAGUE, THAPAR, and LARSEN. Opinion by Thapar.
+*Before: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_McKeague David McKeague], https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amul_Thapar Amul Roger Thapar], and [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joan_Larsen Joan Larsen]. Opinion by Thapar.
 <!-- ******************************************************************************************************************-->

@@ Line 4: / Line 4: @@
 *Alliance for Defending Freedom's Travis C. Barham and others for Meriwether.  D.C. Jenner and Block partner [https://jenner.com/people/AdamUnikowsky Adam G. Unikowsky] for Intervenors. Notre Dame Prof. [https://law.nd.edu/directory/gerard-bradley/ Gerard V. Bradley] for an amicus. Lots of amici.
 *No. 1:18-cv-00753—Susan J. Dlott, District Judge.
-*Argued: November 19, 2020.
+*Argued: November 19, 2020.  Decided and Filed: March 26, 2021.
 *Before: McKEAGUE, THAPAR, and LARSEN. Opinion by Thapar.

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
-==Access Data==
+==Case Details: Title, People, Numbers==
 *[https://adfmedialegalfiles.blob.core.windows.net/files/Meriwether6thCircuitOpinion.pdf. NICHOLAS K. MERIWETHER v. FRANCESCA HARTOP et al.], with JANE DOE; SEXUALITY AND GENDER ACCEPTANCE as Intervenors-Appellees.<br>
 *Alliance for Defending Freedom's Travis C. Barham and others for Meriwether.  D.C. Jenner and Block partner [https://jenner.com/people/AdamUnikowsky Adam G. Unikowsky] for Intervenors. Notre Dame Prof. [https://law.nd.edu/directory/gerard-bradley/ Gerard V. Bradley] for an amicus. Lots of amici.

@@ Line 78: / Line 78: @@
 <!-- ******************************************************************************************************************-->
-==Free Exercise of Religion (my boldface)==
+==The Free Exercise of Religion Holding (my boldface)==
 {{Quotation|
 Meriwether has plausibly alleged that Shawnee State’s application of its gender-identity

@@ Line 78: / Line 78: @@
 <!-- ******************************************************************************************************************-->
-==Free Exercise of Religion==
+==Free Exercise of Religion (my boldface)==
 {{Quotation|
 Meriwether has plausibly alleged that Shawnee State’s application of its gender-identity
-policy was not neutral for at least two reasons. First, officials at Shawnee State exhibited
+policy was not neutral for at least two reasons. First, o'''fficials at Shawnee State exhibited
-hostility to his religious beliefs. And second, irregularities in the university’s adjudication and
+hostility to his religious beliefs'''. And second, '''irregularities in the university’s adjudication''' and
 investigation processes permit a plausible inference of non-neutrality...
-Meriwether “was entitled to a neutral decisionmaker who
+Meriwether “was '''entitled to a neutral decisionmaker''' who
 would give full and fair consideration to his religious objection as he sought to assert it in all of
-the circumstances in which this case was presented, considered, and decided.” Masterpiece,
+the circumstances in which this case was presented, considered, and decided.” ''Masterpiece,''
 S. Ct. at 1732. And that, he at least plausibly did not receive...
-While the hostility Shawnee State exhibited would be enough for Meriwether’s claim to
+While '''the hostility Shawnee State exhibited would be enough for Meriwether’s claim to
-survive a motion to dismiss, Meriwether has more. He alleges that various irregularities in the
+survive a motion to dismiss''', Meriwether has more. He alleges that various irregularities in the
 university’s investigation and adjudication processes also permit an inference of non-neutrality.
 We agree...
 Courts have an obligation to
-meticulously scrutinize irregularities to determine whether a law is being used to suppress
+meticulously scrutinize irregularities to '''determine whether a law is being used to suppress
-religious beliefs. See Lukumi, 508 U.S. at 534–35; Monclova Christian Acad. v. Toledo-Lucas
+religious beliefs.''' See ''Lukumi,'' 508 U.S. at 534–35; ''Monclova Christian Acad. v. Toledo-Lucas
-Cnty. Health Dep’t, 984 F.3d 477, 481–82 (6th Cir. 2020).9
+Cnty. Health Dep’t,'' 984 F.3d 477, 481–82 (6th Cir. 2020).
-And here, that scrutiny reveals signs
+And here, that scrutiny reveals '''signs
-of non-neutrality.
+of non-neutrality.'''
 }}
 <!-- ******************************************************************************************************************-->

← Older revision		Revision as of 04:14, 31 March 2021
Line 76:		Line 76:


		+	<!-- ******************************************************************************************************************-->

		+	==Free Exercise of Religion==
		+	{{Quotation\|
		+	Meriwether has plausibly alleged that Shawnee State’s application of its gender-identity
		+	policy was not neutral for at least two reasons. First, officials at Shawnee State exhibited
		+	hostility to his religious beliefs. And second, irregularities in the university’s adjudication and
		+	investigation processes permit a plausible inference of non-neutrality...
		+
		+	Meriwether “was entitled to a neutral decisionmaker who
		+	would give full and fair consideration to his religious objection as he sought to assert it in all of
		+	the circumstances in which this case was presented, considered, and decided.” Masterpiece,
		+	138 S. Ct. at 1732. And that, he at least plausibly did not receive...
		+
		+	While the hostility Shawnee State exhibited would be enough for Meriwether’s claim to
		+	survive a motion to dismiss, Meriwether has more. He alleges that various irregularities in the
		+	university’s investigation and adjudication processes also permit an inference of non-neutrality.
		+	We agree...
		+
		+	Courts have an obligation to
		+	meticulously scrutinize irregularities to determine whether a law is being used to suppress
		+	religious beliefs. See Lukumi, 508 U.S. at 534–35; Monclova Christian Acad. v. Toledo-Lucas
		+	Cnty. Health Dep’t, 984 F.3d 477, 481–82 (6th Cir. 2020).9
		+	And here, that scrutiny reveals signs
		+	of non-neutrality.
		+	}}
	<!-- ******************************************************************************************************************-->		<!-- ******************************************************************************************************************-->

← Older revision		Revision as of 04:10, 31 March 2021
Line 24:		Line 24:
	Meriwether appealed everything except for dismissal of his equal protection claim, and won on everything except Due Process 3-0 in the Sixth Circuit, which remanded the case to Judge Dlott. [https://adfmedialegalfiles.blob.core.windows.net/files/Meriwether6thCircuitOpinion.pdf The Sixth Circuit said] the university violated his free speech and free exercise rights were violated if the facts were as he alleged them, but declined to find a violation of due process for vagueness given how clear the university's orders had been made to him.		Meriwether appealed everything except for dismissal of his equal protection claim, and won on everything except Due Process 3-0 in the Sixth Circuit, which remanded the case to Judge Dlott. [https://adfmedialegalfiles.blob.core.windows.net/files/Meriwether6thCircuitOpinion.pdf The Sixth Circuit said] the university violated his free speech and free exercise rights were violated if the facts were as he alleged them, but declined to find a violation of due process for vagueness given how clear the university's orders had been made to him.

−	The appellate decision, the big document, is not only decisive, but clear and well written (except that he uses "''id.''"). See https://adfmedialegalfiles.blob.core.windows.net/files/Meriwether6thCircuitOpinion.pdf. There are two distinct reasons Meriwether won: (1) Free Speech, (2) ~~Freedom~~ of Religion.	+	The appellate decision, the big document, is not only decisive, but clear and well written (except that he uses "''id.''"). See https://adfmedialegalfiles.blob.core.windows.net/files/Meriwether6thCircuitOpinion.pdf. There are two distinct reasons Meriwether won: (a) Free Speech, and (b) Free Exercise of Religion.

← Older revision		Revision as of 04:09, 31 March 2021
Line 24:		Line 24:
	Meriwether appealed everything except for dismissal of his equal protection claim, and won on everything except Due Process 3-0 in the Sixth Circuit, which remanded the case to Judge Dlott. [https://adfmedialegalfiles.blob.core.windows.net/files/Meriwether6thCircuitOpinion.pdf The Sixth Circuit said] the university violated his free speech and free exercise rights were violated if the facts were as he alleged them, but declined to find a violation of due process for vagueness given how clear the university's orders had been made to him.		Meriwether appealed everything except for dismissal of his equal protection claim, and won on everything except Due Process 3-0 in the Sixth Circuit, which remanded the case to Judge Dlott. [https://adfmedialegalfiles.blob.core.windows.net/files/Meriwether6thCircuitOpinion.pdf The Sixth Circuit said] the university violated his free speech and free exercise rights were violated if the facts were as he alleged them, but declined to find a violation of due process for vagueness given how clear the university's orders had been made to him.

−	The appellate decision, the big document, is not only decisive, but clear and well written. See https://adfmedialegalfiles.blob.core.windows.net/files/Meriwether6thCircuitOpinion.pdf. There are two distinct reasons Meriwether won: (1) Free Speech, (2) Freedom of Religion.	+	The appellate decision, the big document, is not only decisive, but clear and well written (except that he uses "''id.''"). See https://adfmedialegalfiles.blob.core.windows.net/files/Meriwether6thCircuitOpinion.pdf. There are two distinct reasons Meriwether won: (1) Free Speech, (2) Freedom of Religion.
−