Tagged first amendment

Let’s Force Religious Hypocrisy Out of the Closet

By Ana Choi* In the wake of the Supreme Court’s decision legalizing same-sex marriage in Obergefell v. Hodges last summer, many conservative states have begun to pass legislative measures trying to stem the progress made by the LGBTQ community. North Carolina passed a law prohibiting transgender individuals from using bathrooms that do not match the…

Judges Block Docs Asking About Glocks

By Thomas Tobin* Lawyers and doctors are both trained to ask their clients uncomfortable questions. We expect that the questions these professionals ask will help them reach more informed determinations for their clients. Lawyer-client and doctor-patient relationships have special legal significance as the open exchange with these professionals often elicits private information that should remain…

The Case for Evidence-Based Free Exercise Accommodation: Why the Religious Freedom Restoration Act Is Bad Public Policy

To mark the release of Volume 9.1, Notice & Comment will be highlighting each of the articles in its own blog post. Today’s featured article: Professor Marci A. Hamilton’s The Case for Evidence-Based Free Exercise Accommodation: Why the Religious Freedom Restoration Act Is Bad Public Policy. Professor Hamilton, who holds the Paul R. Verkuil Chair in Public Law at…

Facebook Threats: Will Prosecutors Have to Prove Subjective Intent?

By Ana Choi Today, the Supreme Court will hear oral arguments for Elonis v. United States, an important case dealing with freedom of speech in the context of social media. Petitioner Anthony Elonis was charged and convicted under 18 U.S.C. § 875(c)—which forbids “any threat to injure the person of another”—after composing a series of…

Case Comment: McCullen v. Coakley

Second in the HLPR Case Comment series: McCullen v. Coakley: How Should We Reconcile the First Amendment with Abortion Rights? Revisiting the Supreme Court’s June decision regarding protestors or “counselors” who located near the entrances to abortion clinics, Ana Choi examines the conflict between free speech rights and abortion rights in this case.

Case Comment: Town of Greece v. Galloway

Over the summer, several members of HLPR worked on Case Comments. They discuss major decisions from the last two months (May and June) of the Supreme Court’s most recent term. Compared to our blog posts, they benefit from being able to relate earlier decisions to later ones, to gauge the reaction to the decision, and to…

Dangerous Precedents in Hobby Lobby

by Noah Marks Yesterday morning, the Supreme Court decided Burwell v. Hobby Lobby, holding 5-4 that religious owners of closely-held corporations are exempt from the contraception coverage requirement of the Affordable Care Act based on the 1993 Religious Freedom and Restoration Act. Writing for the majority, Justice Alito strains to emphasize the limited scope of…

Free Exercise Clause Protection for Junk Science

By Tom Watts Today, the Supreme Court decided Burwell v. Hobby Lobby. In this post, I examine an issue that the Court passed over: whether Hobby Lobby’s belief is actually religious. The Court presumed so, but their presumption was incorrect, and the issue is dispositive. This makes the Court’s decision wrong. The First Amendment protects…

McCullen v. Coakley: “Something for Everyone”

By Ana Choi The Supreme Court has handed down its decision in McCullen v. Coakley, holding that the Massachusetts statute creating a 35 feet buffer zone around abortion clinics is unconstitutional on First Amendment grounds. Although the holding is unanimous, the majority opinion (written by C.J. Roberts and joined by JJ. Ginsburg, Breyer, Sotomayor, and…

Old Paper by ThunderThemes.net