Category: U.S. Supreme Court

FREE “The Church Law & Finance Virtual Conference” Sept. 24

FREE “The Church Law & Finance Virtual Conference” Sept. 24. Whiteford, Taylor & Preston, LLP & Aronson, LLC present a free conference several timely topics. The conference consists of several presentations from 10:00 a.m.–1:00 p.m. E.D.T. Register here.

Josh on Theology Thursdays: Church, State, and COVID-19

Josh on Theology Thursdays: Church, State, and COVID-19 Yesterday I had the pleasure of joining Lutheran pastors James Smith (Trinity Episcopal and St. John’s Lutheran in Three Rivers, Michigan) and Chris Laughlin (Messiah Lutheran in Constantine, Michigan) for their “Theology Thursdays,” which they post to their congregations’ Facebook pages while we keep social distance due to COVID-19. We talked about Church and State issues during COVID-19. It was a fun conversation in a difficult time. Go here to watch the hour-long conversation.

Continue reading “Josh on Theology Thursdays: Church, State, and COVID-19” →

Coverage of Masterpiece Cakeshop before oral argument

The U.S. Supreme Court decided to hear Masterpiece Cakeshop, Ltd. v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission. The case involves a Colorado cake baker who declined to make a cake for a gay couple’s wedding. When the Colorado Civil Rights Commission pursued the baker, he argued he was entitled to an exemption from Colorado’s civil-rights laws based on religious and free-speech grounds under the First Amendment. The links below include news coverage, relatively even-handed analysis, and analysis in support of and against the baker’s position that was posted before oral argument, which was scheduled for sometime in the October 2017 term. (This post has been regularly updated through the date of oral argument.) Continue reading “Coverage of Masterpiece Cakeshop before oral argument” →

“U.S. Supreme Court wedding cake case could affect St. Cloud couple’s suit against Minnesota: Both sides in Minnesota will be watching Tuesday when the justices in Washington hear arguments in a parallel case from Colorado.”

“U.S. Supreme Court wedding cake case could affect St. Cloud couple’s suit against Minnesota: Both sides in Minnesota will be watching Tuesday when the justices in Washington hear arguments in a parallel case from Colorado.” The (Minneapolis) StarTribune reports here.

“The Christian Legal Army Behind ‘Masterpiece Cakeshop’ A special investigation into the rise of Alliance Defending Freedom.”

“The Christian Legal Army Behind ‘Masterpiece Cakeshop’ A special investigation into the rise of Alliance Defending Freedom.” Sarah Posner has this report in The Nation.

“Trump Administration Set to Roll Back Birth Control Mandate”

“Trump Administration Set to Roll Back Birth Control Mandate” Robert Pear of the New York Times has this report about coming exemptions to regulations under Affordable Care Act that require employers to provide coverage for contraceptives. The new exemptions allow employers or insurers that object to covering contraceptive based sincerely held religious beliefs or moral convictions. Houses of worship and similar religious employers were exempted under the Obama-era rules, but other religious organizations, including hospitals and schools, and entities that were not overtly religious but that were owned by individuals with religious objections to the coverage were required to provide the coverage. The 2014 Supreme Court decision in Burwell v. Hobby Lobby held that the federal Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) required an exception for closely held, for-profit corporations controlled by owners who object to paying for contraceptives. In 2016 the Supreme Court considered a group of cases brought under RFRA by religious nonprofits, colleges, and schools that sought to expand the exemption as it applied to houses of worship to those groups. Zubik v. Burwell, 136 S. Ct. 1557 (2016). The Supreme Court did not decide the issue, instead remanding the case and encouraging the sides to explore alternative resolution. In May President Trump highlighted one of the groups in that consolidated case, the Little Sisters of the Poor Home for the Aged, praising the nuns who run that organization for their challenge and promising these changes allowing their objections to be accommodated.

ECFA reports on the decision here.