A judicial system can apply one restriction to minorities while exempting the majority

Evidence

Sri Lanka’s Supreme Court has long been a conservative entity that has rarely ruled against the state’s preferences. Not surprisingly—its ruling on the Prohibitions of Forcible Conversions to Religions Bill notwithstanding—the Court also has ruled that the right to practice one’s religion does not include the right to propagate that religion. It has, consequently, denied Christian service organizations the right to incorporate, claiming that doing so would undermine the foremost place guaranteed to Buddhism under the country’s constitution. In short, the Court has ruled that no Christian organization may be incorporated if part of its mission includes proselytizing and that it is illegal for a church to combine religious instruction and charity. Yet, the incorporation of 178 Buddhist and Muslim organizations that combine religious instruction and charity has been approved (Jansz 2004). — Neil DeVotta, Sinhalese Buddhist Nationalist Ideology, 256

Categorization

• QUESTION: Does such asymmetric legal enforcement undermine the ‘protecting Buddhism’ rationale as neutral, or does it reveal the state religion privileges? Relevant to broader patterns of majority-religion legal structuring.
• XREF: connects to: In-group judicial favoritism can cancel out in aggregate and hide overall racial bias. — Joseph Avery, Jim Sidanius, Joel Cooper, Gregory Davis, Amanda N., Bias in the Law: A Definitive Look at…, 782; A court ruling allowed rounding up foreigners on race or religion; Dominant groups are judged individually while minorities are presumed guilty by association (+3 more)

Broader Connections

• In-group judicial favoritism can cancel out in aggregate and hide overall racial bias. #expands (0.85) — Joseph Avery, Jim Sidanius, Joel Cooper, Gregory Davis, Amanda N., Bias in the Law, 782
• A court ruling allowed rounding up foreigners on race or religion #exemplifies (0.85)
• Dominant groups are judged individually while minorities are presumed guilty by association #expands (0.80)
• Reducing racial inequity in courts requires institutional systems, not just attitude change. #qualifies (0.75) — Joseph Avery, Jim Sidanius, Joel Cooper, Gregory Davis, Amanda N., Bias in the Law, 37