At the committee hearing, Democrat Sen. Feinstein questioned her Catholic beliefs on abortion and Republican Sen. Cruz questioned her on the death penalty.
Have you ever wondered what legal mechanism existed that permitted the legalization of slavery in the United States after the Bill of Rights was ratified in 1791? How it was that men, women, and children were held in bondage after Francis Scott Key wrote the famous words, “land of the free, and the home of the brave” in 1812? How segregation persisted in law until the late 1960s?
States that have constitutional provisions that prohibit public aid to all private schools, regardless of whether or not they are religiously affiliated, might have a substantial argument against school voucher claims under Trinity Lutheran v. Comer.
Supreme Court sends voucher cases back to the lower courts “for further consideration in light of Trinity Lutheran Church of Columbia, Inc., v. Comer.”
There are several reasons why the Supreme Court may decide to hear this case when it declined to hear previous religious exception cases.
Last Thursday, President Donald Trump marked the National Day of Prayer with an executive order that at most expressed the administration’s desire that the Department of the Treasury should not unnecessarily threaten the tax-exempt status of religious non-profit organizations if they engage in political activity. Despite stating during the campaign that he would “destroy” the Johnson Amendment, the administration ultimately made a benign gesture affirming existing law while describing its parameters and limits.
ver a year after agreeing to hear the case on January 15, 2016, the Supreme Court has finally set a date for the oral arguments in Trinity Lutheran Church v. Pauley.
The Supreme Court of the State of Washington has rejected a florist’s claim that state anti-discrimination statutes did not apply to her religion-based refusal to sell flowers for use in a same-sex wedding ceremony.
In a stunning report, U.S. Commission on Civil Rights Chairman Martin Castro attacked the Religious Freedom Restoration Act at both the state and federal level, challenged the terms “religious liberty” and “religious liberty” as code for intolerance, and argued that free exercise rights should yield to other civil rights if they come into conflict.
Whether Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump will do more to defend the Free Exercise Clause is an important factor in deciding which candidate to support.