Unanimous SCOTUS Favors Religious Freedom Over LGBTQ Rights In Foster Care Case | Talking Points Memo

[williamv]

How many Catholics are on SCOTUS now? Seven?

[tena]

Word.

Just word.

[occamscoin]

@txlawyer

it sounds like the Phillly law was not neutral and generally applicable because it allowed discretionary exceptions at the sole discretion of some commissioner. If the commissioner can decide that somebody else is worthy of an anti-LGBTQ exemption for secular reasons, they can’t deny it on religious grounds.

So you’re saying that the TPM headline and the bulk of the article are largely wrong, that this is not about religious freedom or the supreme court’s likely attitude towards LGBTQ rights, but rather that philadelphia set up an arbitrary mechanism to permit exceptions to their contract rules, and the first ones to blow up that mechanism happen to be sueing on religious grounds?

[txlawyer]

No. I’m saying that if a statute or other law allows for discretionary exemptions from its otherwise-applicable provisions, it is a violation of an applicant’s religious liberty to deny such an exemption where their reason for requesting it is their religious beliefs.

ETA: In other words, this is all about the exemption baked into the rule, not the broader rule itself.

[steviedee111]

@txlawyer

ETA: In other words, this is all about the exemption baked into the rule, not the broader rule itself.

Could a private school make it a policy they were accepting children of all religious faiths, or no faith at all, except Jews. Because they asserted the lifestyle and beliefs of Jews were incompatible with their school’s mission, or whatever?

[mrf]

On the legal analysis I was listening to earlier on my local NPR affiliate the analyst Jamie Floyd formally of Court TV mentioned the peyote case and Scalias 80 page opinion. She said that Comey Barrett’s opinion on the Philly case states that it’s pretty much settled law even for her on religious freedom issues.

[cvilledem]

And exactly HOW MANY SCOTI are Catholics? They should all have been recused. Since it was a unanimous vote it wouldn’t have changed anything, but it is a legitimate criticism of the lack of diversity on this “court.”

[txlawyer]

@steviedee111

Could a private school make it a policy they were accepting children of all religious faiths, or no faith at all, except Jews.

A private school affiliated with a church is perfectly free to make admission dependent upon people’s religion. A private school that is not affiliated with a church cannot. The former is Free Exercise. The latter is the public accommodations provisions of the 1964 Civil Rights Act.

[thunderclapnewman]

@quin

That the church of the eternal pedophile has a right to anything but scorn is hard to understand.

True on its face, but that has nothing to do with the complaint from CSS.

[jtx]

Of course if we look from the perspective of the child?
Do they care if if the guardian supports gay rights?
Somehow I doubt it.

[benthere]

Sounds like the SC made this decision with limitations knowing that many of those who claim “religious liberty” are certifiably nuts or strident zealots.

[steviedee111]

@txlawyer

A private school affiliated with a church is perfectly free to make admission dependent upon people’s religion.

Would it complicate their position if they were a Catholic affiliated school, yet accepted ALL religions, except Jews?

[iceape]

Nobody is born with a religion. You can be born into a religious family that will indoctrinate you into the religion that the family follows, but you were not born with it. By contrast people are born with their sexual alignment. Yes, I know that is a simplification, but it is also true.

[rockitttla]

I agree with you overall, but the Court’s reasoning really feels like they were searching for a way, any way, to reverse and give the Church a win. The Court never seems to work that hard to find consensus when the rights of minorities and the powerless are at issue.

[mike_in_houston]

They are a rather “uppity” bunch.

[steviedee111]

@iceape

By contrast people are born with their sexual alignment. Yes, I know that is a simplification, but it is also true.

Is sexual alignment purely a physical state? Can you be born with male organs, but psychologically be female? On what are you basing “alignment”?

[txlawyer]

@mrf

Jamie Floyd formally of Court TV mentioned the peyote case and Scalias 80 page opinion. She said that Comey Barrett’s opinion on the Philly case states that it’s pretty much settled law even for her on religious freedom issues.

Justice Handmaid’s Tale makes it very clear in her concurrence that she’s open to revisiting the Smith decision. She just says it is not necessary to do so in this case because the existence of the exemption process already subjects the denial to strict scrutiny, which would be the same level of scrutiny as if Smith were overruled.

[steviedee111]

@mike_in_houston

They are a rather “uppity” bunch.

Yet tastefully decorated.

[txlawyer]

@steviedee111

Would it complicate their position if they were a Catholic affiliated school, yet accepted ALL religions, except Jews?

No.

[lallen56]

Philly could form alliances with other agencies that don’t specialize in discriminating against gays, stop sending business to the Catholic bunch, and not renew the Catholic contract when it comes due. Just freeze the prejudiced bunch out.

The hope is that viable secular agencies exist for Philly to contract with. If not - there’s a business opportunity for secular, open-minded, un-bigoted, etc. people to start a valuable service based on helping everyone, not just certain people.

The bigots won this round but they don’t have to win the whole game.