The Supreme Court ruled unanimously that plaintiffs whose religious rights were violated can sue government employees individually for monetary damages.
The language of the new Los Angeles COVID restriction specifically exempts religious gatherings as a matter of constitutional right. Â
In a major victory for religious congregations, delivered late on Thanksgiving Eve, the United States Supreme Court blocked the state of New York from implementing gathering restrictions that the Court ruled discriminate against religious congregations.
On October 6, 2020, the United States Supreme Court heard oral arguments in a case on the issue of whether individual FBI agents can be held financially liable if they are found to have violated the Religious Freedom Restoration Act. The underlying case involves Muslim-Americans who alleged that individual FBI agents put them on the “no fly” list after they refused to act as informants against fellow Muslims in terrorism-related investigations.
Ginsburg wrote little on the religion clauses, but she frequently joined with those Justices who favored a strong separation of church and state.Â
Today, Founders’ First Freedom, Inc. filed an amicus brief urging the United States Supreme Court to revisit and restore the workplace religious accommodation standard found in Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
Supreme Court sidesteps the free exercise claim and grants government agencies the power to determine whether to apply the ACA contraceptive mandates to employers.Â
With the death of state Blaine Amendments this week, religious schools that welcome state money might find that they are now subject to regulation that may undermine their very reason for existence.Â
The Supreme Court has ruled against George Soros’ Open Society Foundations and upheld a law requiring foreign NGOs receiving funds to sign an anti-prostitution pledge.
This morning the Supreme Court struck down a Louisiana law that required doctors who perform abortions to have admitting privileges at a nearby hospital. The issue in June Medical Services LLC v. Russo, was whether this limit actually protected the health of pregnant women and wasn’t in place just to make it more difficult to have an abortion. This was very similar to the issue the Court last visited in 2016 (Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt) when it overturned a Texas abortion doctor admitting privileges requirement.