The National Legal Foundation (NLF) this week filed an amicus (friend of the court) brief on behalf of a Christian photographer in Loudon County, Virginia, in the of Updegrove v. Herring. The photographer, Bob Updegrove, believes that God equips people with gifts to create art that reflects God’s beauty, artistry, and truth, and that he
In Otto v. Boca Raton (Nov. 20, 2020), the Eleventh Circuit (which has jurisdiction over Florida, Georgia, and Alabama) became the first federal appellate court to rule unconstitutional one of the “anti-conversion” acts inundating the country. In doing so, it split with the Third and Ninth Circuits, which have upheld similar conversion therapy bans. This
“Hard cases make bad law,” and national emergencies make hard cases. It has proven true in our country’s jurisprudence, with one of the most notorious examples being the Supreme Court’s refusal to vindicate the claims of West Coast Americans who were put in “relocation” or “assembly centers” en masse during World War II solely because
Justice Barrett hasn’t published an opinion yet, but she’s just made her presence known. When Justice Ginsburg was on the Court earlier this year, she joined a 5-4 majority that included Chief Justice Roberts and that refused the pleas of churches to stop, on an “emergency” basis, jurisdictions that were clamping down harder on in-person
The National Legal Foundation has joined a law suit against the Montgomery County, Maryland, school board because it has adopted a transgender policy that requires its personnel to hide from parents that their minor child is going “trans” at school if the student or school personnel believe that the parents may not be “supportive.” The
The Supreme Court term begins this month, and, as of now, it does not appear to be as action-packed for religious liberty as this past term. However, at least one important case is in the hopper, and several are in the pipeline. And, of course, all is overshadowed by the presumed replacement of Justice Ginsburg
Outrageous! A professor at a major university “came clean” and admitted that she has been falsely claiming for years that she has “Black” blood. The brickbats came out, although it wasn’t entirely clear why. Because she had taken an affirmative action slot from someone who otherwise would have had it? Because she wasn’t one of
The majority opinion in Bostock was surreal. How could six very intelligent people say that discrimination on account of sex includes discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity? Justice Gorsuch reached that conclusion [delete] because, if an employer wouldn’t fire a man for sleeping with a woman but would fire a woman
Chief Justice Roberts has been the center of attention recently, whipsawing both liberals and conservatives with his various opinions. He sided with Justice Gorsuch and the four “liberals” on the bench in ruling that “sex” in Title VII of the Civil Rights Act includes “sexual orientation” and “gender identity,” and he wrote a somewhat baffling
The Supreme Court in Bostock v. Comstock County and two linked cases decided that, when the Civil Rights Act of 1964 outlawed employment discrimination on the basis of “sex,” it included discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity. Now, Justice Gorsuch, writing for the majority, freely admitted that the legislators in 1964 didn’t have