Idaho v. Freeman
United States District Court for the District of Idaho
507 F. Supp. 706 (1981)
- Written by Elizabeth Yingling, JD
Facts
Judge Marion J. Callister, a member and former regional representative of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (Mormon Church), presided over a lawsuit brought by Idaho and Arizona (plaintiffs) objecting to Congress’s extension of the ratification period for the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA). The National Organization for Women (NOW), an intervenor in the case, filed a motion to disqualify Judge Callister, alleging that his impartiality might be reasonably questioned because (1) the Mormon Church publicly opposed the ERA and the extension of the ratification period; (2) regional representatives in three states engaged in lobbying efforts opposing the ERA; (3) as a regional representative, Judge Callister had a duty to assist the leadership of the Mormon Church; (4) it was presumed that, in his capacity as a regional representative, Judge Callister promoted the Mormon Church’s opposition to the ERA; and (5) the Mormon Church had excommunicated the leader of a group known as Mormons for ERA. NOW did not contend that disqualification would be required solely because Judge Callister was a member of the Mormon Church. Judge Callister countered that (1) he had ceased being a regional representative six months after the lawsuit was filed, (2) the Mormon Church was not involved in the pending lawsuit or any other lawsuit involving the ERA, (3) regional representatives were uncompensated lay clergy members who trained the presidents of local units of the Mormon Church on leadership skills and priesthood programs, (4) regional representatives did not serve as intermediaries between the local presidents and the high-level church leadership, (5) Judge Callister never publicly gave his opinion on the ERA, and (5) the excommunication of the Mormons for ERA member was not due to ERA support.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Callister, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 805,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.