Insight: The definition of religious liberty is expanding
The Supreme Court is finding that the right to practice a faith without government interference means religious people don t have to recognize the rights of others.
By Steven K. GreenWillamette University
Share
The Supreme Court’s current term is winding down, but there are still several cases to be decided – and, as with most terms, a controversy over church-state matters looms.
Fulton vs. City of Philadelphia is among the cases still to be decided. It centers on a requirement that private agencies that receive city funding – in this case an adoption agency – do not discriminate against any community they serve, including members of the LGBTQ community. This nondiscrimination requirement applies to both religious and nonreligious organizations. But the adoption service at the heart of the case – Catholic Social Services – refused to comply, asserting that not being allowed to discriminate against gay couple
Day: April 17, 2021
Massachusetts Democratic Senator Ed Markey and three House Democrats announced their plan to expand the Supreme Court from 9 to 13 Justices this week. They were careful to couch their bald power grab in media-friendly terms, sputtering their concern for the “Court’s legitimacy” and insisting they were not packing the Court, they were “unpacking” it. Orwell had today’s Democrats in mind when he wrote “Nineteen Eighty-Four.” Hardly a day goes by where they aren’t caught trying to change the very definition of words to suit their political needs.
The plan, notwithstanding media hype, is DOA. Even House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said she had “no plans” to bring it to a vote. Associate Justice Breyer, one of the stalwart liberals on the Court, warned against expanding the Court as well. And with the late revered-by-progressives Justice Ruth Ginsberg – whose opinion, you might think, would matter to leftists on Court matters, of all things – on th
Democrats warn the Court
Massachusetts Democratic Senator Ed Markey and three House Democrats announced their plan to expand the Supreme Court from 9 to 13 Justices this week. They were careful to couch their bald power grab in media-friendly terms, sputtering their concern for the “Court’s legitimacy” and insisting they were not packing the Court, they were “unpacking” it. Orwell had today’s Democrats in mind when he wrote “Nineteen Eighty-Four.” Hardly a day goes by where they aren’t caught trying to change the very definition of words to suit their political needs.
The plan, notwithstanding media hype, is DOA. Even House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said she had “no plans” to bring it to a vote. Associate Justice Breyer, one of the stalwart liberals on the Court, warned against expanding the Court as well. And with the late revered-by-progressives Justice Ruth Ginsberg – whose opinion, you might think, would matter to leftists on Court matters, of all things –
May Issue Carry Challenge from NJ Filed in SCOTUS – Bearing Arms bearingarms.com - get the latest breaking news, showbiz & celebrity photos, sport news & rumours, viral videos and top stories from bearingarms.com Daily Mail and Mail on Sunday newspapers.
The Supreme Court s current term is winding down, but there are still several cases to be decided â and, as with most terms, a controversy over church-state matters looms.
Fulton vs. City of Philadelphia is among the cases still to be decided. It centers on a requirement that private agencies that receive city funding â in this case an adoption agency â do not discriminate against any community they serve, including members of the LGBTQ community. This nondiscrimination requirement applies to both religious and nonreligious organizations. But the adoption service at the heart of the case â Catholic Social Services â refused to comply, asserting that not being allowed to discriminate against gay couples infringed upon its religious beliefs.