The U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to hear St. Isidore of Seville Catholic Virtual School v. Charter School Board, a case addressing whether a religious charter school can receive public funding. The case centers around a proposed online Catholic charter school in Oklahoma that was denied authorization by the state’s Charter School Board. The board…
The Supreme Court has declined to hear a case that questions whether EMTALA, which requires hospitals to provide emergency care, including abortions to protect a woman’s health, preempts Idaho’s law allowing abortions only to prevent death.
While critics decry it as a radical departure from church-state separation, a closer examination reveals a more nuanced approach that in some ways echoes mainstream political positions from the not-so-distant past.
The primary issue in Bacon v. Woodward concerns whether the City of Spokane’s implementation of Washington Governor Jay Inslee’s COVID-19 Proclamation, which required state agency workers to be fully vaccinated, violated the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment as applied to Spokane firefighters who sought religious exemptions.
While the spotlight has been on the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling regarding continued access to mifepristone, an abortion-inducing medication, the unanimous verdict is a significant victory for the liberty of conscience for medical practitioners.
Our journey started for us a long way from home, in a city we’d never heard of, with a precious little boy looking for his parents. Today our lives are filled with his love and joy and his excitement for life.
Why AB 2098 could lead to a chilling effect among California’s medical professionals
The Idaho Supreme Court ruled the state constitution does not include a fundamental right to abortion and the framers and adopters of the Inalienable Rights Clause did not intend to implicitly protect abortion as a fundamental right.
With rising acceptance of euthanasia and assisted suicide comes the expanding number of Canadian citizens deemed eligible for such procedures. This article delves into the disturbing implications this has, from the vulnerabilty of patients with physical and mental illnesses to financial hardships as a reason for such end-of-life choices. The moral, ethical, and legal implications are explored, as well as a moral approach to maintaining safeguards for those vulnerable minorties. Canadians must step up to the challenge of understanding and critically examining the increasing availabilty of euthanasia in order to ensure those most in need are preserved and respected.
Regardless of what you think about abortion, the Supreme Court’s rationale in Dobbs severely limits the scope of the Bill of Rights. What the Court could have done differently.