Yesterday, the New Mexico Supreme Court ruled that the First Amendment does not protect a photographer’s decision not to photograph a same-sex commitment ceremony even if it would violate the photographer’s deeply held religious beliefs.
Calls for protecting “religious liberty” have expanded beyond school prayer and religious monuments on government property to become a rallying call for the Christian right in America following the U.S. Supreme Court rulings on same-sex marriage, the Obamacare contraception mandate,
A Call for Peace in the Fight Over Same-Sex Marriage Read More »
The story of Savonarola is not a lesson in the necessity of violence for a successful revolution, but rather a lesson in the dangerous consequences of speaking truth to power.
The Firebrand: The Dangers of Speaking Truth to Power (Liberty Magazine) Read More »
Neither Hollingsworth nor Windsor demand that any church, even in states that allow gay marriage, be forced to conduct gay weddings. Moreover, these decisions do not affect the ability of churches to decry homosexuality or homosexual conduct as immoral.
What Changed? Will the Court’s Same-Sex Marriage Cases Affect You? Read More »
By Michael Peabody – On Monday, June 24, 2013 the U.S. Supreme Court issued two 5-4 decisions that will make it more difficult for plaintiffs to prove that their employers violated Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Title VII is the federal law designed to protect employees from discrimination on the basis of factors such as race, sex, and religion.
Two Supreme Court Decisions Narrow Scope of Employers’ Title VII Liability Read More »
By Jason Hines – Now the clock is ticking for the group because there are KY tourism tax incentives for the project that are set to expire in May of 2014. The longer it takes to open the park, the less the group can receive in rebates. Under the current plan, the group can receive up to 25% of the cost of the project over ten years.
Prayers, Parks, and Monuments: Litigation Over Religious Symbols in America Read More »
This week, two members of the North Carolina House of Representatives submitted a resolution which would declare that “the Constitution of the United States of America does not prohibit states or their subsidiaries from making laws respecting an establishment of religion.” In other words, the legislation declared that that the state could make its own laws about religion and the federal government would not be able to stop them. Although the resolution is not likely to be approved, it does deserve some serious examination as it reflects a common argument arising in the religious right that the Establishment Clause does not apply to the states.
States Rights and the Religion Clauses: Examining the North Carolina Resolution Read More »
Students at Stanford University School of Law have a unique opportunity to participate in the nation’s only law-school based clinic program that focuses on issues regarding religious freedom and accommodation.
Stanford Law Program Promotes Religious Accommodation Read More »
One of the more interesting aspects of the gay marriage debate that the arguments of the last two days have highlighted is how different the discussion of marriage is from the religious to the legal realm. Religion was not mentioned one time over the course of the two days and neither should it have been. The issues of the extension of civil marriage are not issues of theology or spirituality (and they still won’t be if same-sex marriage became legal nationwide tomorrow).
By Jason Hines – Today was a landmark day for the Supreme Court, as it heard arguments on the constitutionality of Proposition 8. I have written about this case at every level (on the state level and at the 9th Cir.) so it only seems right that I talk about the arguments that took place earlier today. However, it doesn’t make sense to give a straight up and down summary or even a major analysis (there are plenty of people who did a good job of that, including this article by Adam Serwer), but there are some things that I want to highlight. Some will be important, some won’t, but these are the things that came to mind as I listened to the oral arguments –
Outcome Unpredictable but Prop 8 Supporters Had Tough Day in S. Court Read More »
