Blog: The Headleys on Appeal II - 2012-02-11
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
The Headleys on Appeal II February 11, 2012,
Scientology's attorney argued that the Headleys could not argue psychological and social coercion based on their upbringing in the Church: that inevitably ran up against First Amendment issues. Lieberman for Scientology Judge Wright Nelson started Eric Lieberman off by putting it to him that there were scenarios in which ministerial exception would not apply.
"How do we distinguish this case?" she asked.
The first case she raised was the one involving Devendra Shukla, a Hindu priest awarded $2.3 compensation in December 2010 by a New York court: he had been forced into working as a virtual indentured servant for seven years in a Hindu temple in New York.[i]
Categories:
- 1964
- 2004
- 2005
- 2010
- 2012
- Appeal
- Barry Van Sickle
- Blog post
- Brooklyn
- California
- Child labor
- Claire Headley
- Clear
- Congress
- Daily Mail
- Eric Lieberman
- First Amendment
- Human trafficking
- Infinite Complacency
- Jesus
- Jonny Jacobsen
- Judge Wright
- New York
- New York Post
- Quicky
- Religious Technology Center
- Sea Org
- US Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals