英语翻译In weighing the interests of Shahar and the Attorney General,the district court dispensed with discussion of Shahar's interest in intimately associating with her future spouse,concentrating exclusively on the Attorney General's interest i

英语翻译In weighing the interests of Shahar and the Attorney General,the district court dispensed with discussion of Shahar's interest in intimately associating with her future spouse,concentrating exclusively on the Attorney General's interest i
英语翻译
In weighing the interests of Shahar and the Attorney General,the district court dispensed with discussion of Shahar's interest in intimately associating with her future spouse,concentrating exclusively on the Attorney General's interest in the "efficient operation" of the Department.The court uncritically accepted two justifications for the withdrawal of the employment offer.First,it repeated the Attorney General's argument that to employ Shahar,who had "held herself out" as intending to marry another woman,would affect the Department's public credibility by making the Department appear to endorse conflicting attitudes toward Georgia's failure to recognize same-sex marriages and the state's ban on consensual sodomy.Second,it deferred to the Attorney General's argument that Shahar lacked the "discretion and good judgment" necessary to be a staff attorney at the Department since she had not taken "great pains to refrain from conduct which could be interpreted as contrary to a Department position on a particular issue."
After dispensing with Shahar's intimate and expressive association claims,the district court rejected her free exercise,equal protection,and substantive due process claims.The court,again applying the Pickering balancing test,rejected Shahar's assertion that,because of the religious nature of her planned union with her partner,the Attorney General's action had violated her right of free exercise of religion.
As for Shahar's equal protection claim that the withdrawal constituted state discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation,the court concluded that because there was no evidence that the Attorney General had withdrawn the offer because Shahar was a lesbian,there was no discriminatory intent,which is an essential element of such an equal protection claim.The court instead found that the evidence could show only that the Attorney General withdrew the offer because Shahar had "held herself out" as marrying her female partner and not that he had done so because of her sexual orientation.
Finally,the district court rejected Shahar's substantive due process claim,concluding that she had failed to allege that the withdrawal had deprived her of either a property or a liberty interest other than her freedom of association and free exercise of religion.Shahar then appealed the decision to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit.

英语翻译In weighing the interests of Shahar and the Attorney General,the district court dispensed with discussion of Shahar's interest in intimately associating with her future spouse,concentrating exclusively on the Attorney General's interest i
在权衡利益沙哈尔和总检察长,区域法院免除讨论沙哈尔的利益紧密联系在一起的未来与她的配偶,集中专门对总检察长的兴趣在“有效运作”的部门.法院全盘接受两个理由撤出就业提供.首先,它重复了总检察长的论点,即雇用沙哈尔,谁曾举办的“自己的”作为打算另一名女子结婚,会影响到该部的公众信誉,使该部似乎赞同态度格鲁吉亚冲突的不承认同性婚姻和国家禁止合意.第二,它推迟到总检察长的论点,即沙哈尔缺乏“判断和良好的判断”是一个必要的工作人员在该部的律师,因为她没有采取“着力避免的行为可以被解释为违反了新闻部的立场对某一问题.免除沙哈尔后的亲密和表达协会声称,区法院驳回了她的自由活动,平等保护,实质性正当程序要求.法院,再次运用皮克林平衡测试,拒绝沙哈尔声称,由于宗教性质的计划,她与她的合作伙伴联盟,总检察长的行动侵犯了她的权利,自由从事宗教活动.
至于沙哈尔的平等保护,声称撤回构成国家的基础上的歧视性倾向,法院的结论是,因为没有证据表明,总检察长已撤回要约,因为沙哈尔是一个女同志,没有歧视的意图,这是一个重要因素,例如平等保护索赔.法院不是发现证据可能只显示律政司撤消了该提议,因为沙哈尔已举办的“自己的”娶了她作为女性的合作伙伴,而不是说,他这样做是因为她的性取向.
最后,区法院驳回沙哈尔的实质性正当程序的要求,最后,她没有说,撤出剥夺了她的任何财产或自由的兴趣以外她结社自由和自由从事宗教活动.沙哈尔然后提出上诉的决定,美国上诉法院第十一巡回.