The past 40 years have seen significant divergence between the US and UK around the law on indirect discrimination

At the end of June, the United States Supreme Court’s ruling Texas Department of Housing v Inclusive Communities Project held that the Fair Housing Act prohibited both direct and indirect discrimination based on race. Tarunabh Khaitan writes that since the 1970s, the US has focused on the discriminators while in the UK, the impact of a policy on the victim, not the intent of those making it, has become much more important

The Place of Religion in Human Rights Law: Distinguishing Freedom of Religion from the Right against Religious Discrimination

This paper argues that, while they are often conflated, the right to freedom of religion and the right against religious discrimination are in fact distinct human rights. Religious freedom is best understood as protecting our interest in religious adherence (and non-adherence), understood from the committed perspective of the (non)adherent. The right against religious discrimination is best understood as protecting our non-committal interest in the unsaddled membership of our religious group. Thus understood, the two rights have distinct normative rationales. Key doctrinal implications follow for the respective scope of the two rights, whether they may be claimed against non-state actors, and their divergent assessment of religious establishment. These differences reveal a complex map of two overlapping, but conceptually distinct, human rights which are not necessarily breached simultaneously