Written by David Limbaugh
Colorado baker Jack Phillips is a perpetual offender. He simply will not do. His offense? Unswervingly honoring his deeply held, and constitutionally protected, religious beliefs.
We’ve all heard of Phillips and his travails. Leftist bullies have been tormenting him for years, beginning in 2012, when the Colorado Civil Rights Commission targeted him for refusing to make a custom-designed cake to celebrate a same-sex wedding.
After several setbacks in various tribunals, Phillips was finally vindicated in a 7-to-2 U.S.… Continue Reading
Written by Jorge Gomez
June could be a critical month for religious freedom in America like never before. Over the next few weeks, the U.S. Supreme Court is likely to release most of the decisions for its current term—including cases in which First Liberty is fighting to defend people of faith and religious organizations.
Below, we’ll recap several First Amendment cases pending before the nation’s highest court and how the outcome in each of these could be a turning point for the constitutional freedoms of millions of Americans.… Continue Reading
Tags: Americans For Prosperity v. Becerra, Catholic Social Services, Citizen Power Initiatives for China, education choice, First Liberty, Fulton v. Philadelphia, Joe Biden, North American Mission Board, Richard Blumenthal, Roe v. Wade, school choice, SCOTUS, Stephen Breyer, U.S. Supreme Court
Religious Liberty | David E. Smith | June 12, 2021 5:00 AM | Comments Off on Why June Could be Decisive for Religious Freedom and the Future of the Nation’s Highest Court
Written by Jorge Gomez
When Americans hear the term “court-packing,” they almost instinctively make a connection to the radical coup attempt of the U.S. Supreme Court.
However, court-packing isn’t limited to adding stacks of politically motivated, activist justices to the nation’s highest court.
While rigging the U.S. Supreme Court would indeed destroy one of America’s most venerated institutions, the far Left is also waging a two-front attack to ideologically capture the lower federal courts—a plot that could endanger the judiciary’s integrity from top to bottom and accelerate the erosion of our God-given rights and freedoms.… Continue Reading
Written by Terence P. Jeffrey
Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Brett Kavanaugh, both nominated by Republican presidents, have both written absurd opinions on abortion laws.
The case of Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health, which the U.S. Supreme Court will hear this year, could give them an opportunity to redeem themselves.
At issue in this case is a Mississippi law that bans most abortions after a baby’s 15th gestational week. The question: Can a state prohibit doctors from killing unborn babies who are not yet old enough to survive outside the womb?… Continue Reading
Tags: Anthony Kennedy, Antonin Scalia, Brett Kavanaug, Clarence Thomas, David Souter, Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health, Donald Trump, Elena Kagan, Garza v. Hargan, John Roberts, June Medical Services v. Russo, Karen Henderson, Neil Gorsuch, Planned Parenthood v. Casey, Roe v. Wade, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Samuel Alito, Sandra Day O'Connor, Sonia Sotomayor, Stephen Breyer, U.S. Supreme Court, Whole Woman's Health v. Hellerstedt
Sanctity of Life | David E. Smith | May 19, 2021 7:00 AM | Comments Off on Will Roberts and Kavanaugh Stand With the Unborn or the Unjust?
Written by Liberty McArtor
A lot has changed since President Franklin Roosevelt tried to rig the U.S. Supreme Court in 1937, but some things stay the same—like widespread opposition to court-packing among both political parties.
When President Roosevelt tried to increase the number of U.S. Supreme Court justices to advance his New Deal agenda in the late 1930s, his own party was key in stopping him. Despite FDR’s overall popularity, Congress—and the American people—recognized that his court-packing plan was a “bonehead idea,” to use Joe Biden’s term from 1983.… Continue Reading
Written by John A. Sparks
Six months ago, the idea of expanding the size of the U.S. Supreme Court was side-stepped by presidential candidate Joe Biden, and the issue seemed to wane. But now, “court packing” has surfaced once again—and in two forms. The first is an executive order from President Biden creating a commission to study possible reforms of the U.S. Supreme Court. The second is legislation proposed by progressive Democrats to increase the court’s size by four new justices.… Continue Reading
Tags: Donald J. Trump, Erwin Chemerinsky, George W. Bush, Hugo Black, James Lindgren, Jimmy Carter, John A. Sparks, John Marshall, John Roberts, Joseph Story, Roe v. Wade, Samuel Alito, Stephen J. Field, Steven Calabresi, U.S. Supreme Court, William Brennan
Federal Issues, Judicial Branch | David E. Smith | May 7, 2021 7:00 AM | Comments Off on Court Packing 2.0: Why The U.S. Supreme Court Should Not Be Changed
Written by Liberty McArtor
America moved closer to a 180-degree shift last week when President Joe Biden established the Presidential Commission on the Supreme Court of the United States. And now, the treacherous idea of court-packing is closer to becoming reality, as Democrats filed a bill this week to add four (4) seats to the U.S. Supreme Court.
In examining “reforms” to the U.S. Supreme Court, the major issue the commission will examine is court-packing—put simply, increasing the number of justices on the U.S.… Continue Reading
Written by Thorin Anderson
Alexander Hamilton wrote in Federalist 78 that the U.S. Supreme Court would be the weakest branch of government because it had “no influence over either the sword or the purse.” Why then the panic and flaming hair on the Democrat side of the isle with the elevation of Amy Coney Barrett to that Court? What gives? She claims to be an originalist, and by definition an originalist ignores his or her own policy preferences and yields to the intention of the U.S.… Continue Reading
Written by Daniel Horowitz
Democrats never have any doubts about their court nominees. They know with certainty that once their picks are on the court, they will be willing to do anything in a real case to interpret the U.S. Constitution the way they see it. They will rule with the party’s preferred political outcomes regardless of past precedent or the plain meaning of the Constitution. There is no reason why conservatives cannot have that same confidence that GOP nominees will rule on the side of the original meaning of the U.S.… Continue Reading
Tags: 14th Amendment, Antonin Scalia, Arizona v. United States, Bill of RIghts, Bladensburg cross case, Bostock v. Clayton County, Civil Rights Act of 1964, Clarence Thomas, Due Process, Education Amendments Act of 1972, Eighth Amendment, Equal Protection, Establishment Clause, Griggs v. Duke Power Co., illegal aliens, John Marshall, Judicial Nominations, Neil Gorsuch, Obergefell, Patchak v. Zinke, Plyler v. Doe, Privileges and Immunities Clause, SCOTUS, Supremacy Clause, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee, U.S. Supreme Court, Voting Rights Act, Zadvydas v. Davis
Federal Issues, Judicial Branch | David E. Smith | September 24, 2020 7:17 AM | Comments Off on 16 Questions Conservatives Should Ask Any SCOTUS Nominee
Written by John A. Sparks
Sometimes, the facts of a case have an emotional appeal in addition to a strong constitutional basis. Espinoza v. Montana certainly qualifies.
Kendra Espinoza, a hard working (three jobs) and determined single mom, decided to take her two daughters out of the local public schools and enroll them in Stillwater Christian School in Kalispell, Montana. She explained that she “wanted them to be able to read the Bible and be taught how to pray, and taught from that faith-based perspective.”… Continue Reading
Tags: Anti Christian Hate, Brett Kavanaugh, Christian school, Christian schools, Clarence Thomas, Constitution, Espinoza v. Montana, First Amendment, government mandated religion, John Roberts, Kendra Espinoza, Montana, Neil Gorsuch, religious liberty, Samuel Alito, School vouchers, SCOTUS, Stillwater Christian School, the Bible, Trinity Lutheran v. Comer, U.S. Supreme Court
Judicial Branch, Religious Liberty | Benjamin D. Smith | July 11, 2020 4:00 AM | Comments Off on An Important Win for Religious Liberty: Espinoza v. Montana