The Supreme Court’s decision in Trinity Lutheran Church v. Comer is a resounding victory for religious liberty. Seven of nine Supreme Court Justices held that Missouri may not offer a benefit to all nonprofit organizations except religious ones.
Little Sisters, Would You Please
Mother Loraine Marie Maguire, (C), of the Little Sisters of the Poor, walks down the steps of the US Supreme Court.(Photo by Mark Wilson/Getty Images)Scenes from an Argument
I’ve perused the argument transcript in Zubik v. Burwell (better known as Little Sisters of the Poor v. Burwell) and some of the press coverage. I’ve also looked at the press pictures and noodled over whose side I’m on—the grim-faced harridans demanding free contraceptives now, or the cheerful Little Sisters.
Justice Sotomayor, Today’s Paternal-Rights Case, and Tomorrow’s Marriage Cases
Tomorrow the Supreme Court will issue its opinions in the marriage cases. Today, in a less prominent case, the Court treated the issue of parental, and more particularly, paternal rights. As I've discussed here, there is a constitutional presumption in favor of natural-parental trusteeship, a presumption that is in tension with the contradictory presumption that arises where the state recognizes same-sex relationships as marriage. Today's case, Adoptive Couple v. Baby Girl, involved a statutory, and not a constitutional, issue. Still, the dissent , authored by Justice Sotomayor, took pains to mention the constitutional presumption that I've emphasized. There is, she…
Why FCC v. Fox Television Stations, Inc., Fascinates an ERISA Lawyer
In FCC v. Fox Television Stations, Inc., and a companion case involving ABC, seven Justices ruled that decency standards promulgated by the Federal Communications Commission were so vague that their application to television programs broadcast by the respondents’ affiliates violated the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment. On that basis, the Court voided FCC orders finding that the respondents had violated 18 U.S.C. § 1464 (and imposing what I take to be a civil forfeiture of almost $1.25 million on ABC’s affiliates). Justice Ginsburg concurred in the result on First Amendment grounds, and Justice Sotomayor did not participate in the consideration or decision in the case.
Three Observations About Knox v. SEIU
Even for someone outside the world of legal academics, it was an extraordinarily interesting week at the Supreme Court. I found two of this week’s decisions particularly intriguing. The one I will discuss in this post, Knox v. SEIU, signals the Court’s unwillingness to rely on legal fictions to justify state-compelled speech, and it may also signal a willingness to make a deeper commitment to prohibiting involuntary association, as well. The other, FCC v. Fox Television Stations, Inc., is particularly interest to me because it could have important implications in my principal area of practice (which is about as far removed from broadcast licensing as possible). But I will save a discussion of that decision for another day during my stint as a temp for the vacationing Mike Greve.
