Free Republic 4th Quarter Fundraising Target: $88,000 Receipts & Pledges to-date: $18,924
21%  
Woo hoo!! And the first 21% is in!! Thank you all very much!! God bless.

Keyword: scotus

Brevity: Headers | « Text »
  • Supreme Court: Discrimination laws do not protect certain employees of religious groups

    01/16/2012 7:30:19 AM PST · by tired&retired · 8 replies
    Washington Post ^ | January 11, 2012 | Robert Barnes
    "Justice Clarence Thomas said in a concurring opinion that he would go beyond the majority’s holding and leave up to the church the definition of who is covered by the exception. Civil courts, he said, should “defer to a religious organization’s good-faith understanding of who qualifies as a minister.” Justices Samuel A. Alito Jr. and Elena Kagan wrote separately to make clear that they do not think the term “minister” is central to courts determining who is covered by the exemption. Catholics, Jews, Muslims, Hindus and Buddhists rarely use the title, they wrote. The function performed by the employee is...
  • JON CARROLL { The Lutherans seem so nice, too }

    01/16/2012 7:46:37 AM PST · by SmithL · 21 replies · 2+ views
    San Francisco Chronicle ^ | 1/16/12 | Jon Carroll
    Let us first review the First Amendment as signed by those very Founding Fathers we so zealously quarrel about: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances." Naturally, various legal penumbras, as they say, have formed around each of these phrases, with freedom of speech bringing up one set of issues and freedom of religious expression another. The First Amendment is regarded by...
  • Supreme Court delivers a knockout punch to the White House

    01/13/2012 9:07:20 AM PST · by Veritas_et_libertas · 13 replies
    Fox News ^ | January 11, 2012 | Peter Johnson Jr.
    Wednesday the United States Supreme Court delivered a knockout blow to the White House in the cause of religious liberty. Chief Justice John Roberts, writing for a unanimous court swatted away the government’s claim that the Lutheran Church did not have the right to fire a “minister of religion” who, after six years of Lutheran religious training had been commissioned as a minister, upon election by her congregation. The fired minister -- who also taught secular subjects -- claimed discrimination in employment. The Obama administration, always looking for opportunities to undermine the bedrock of First Amendment religious liberty, eagerly agreed....
  • Supreme Court upholds 'ministerial exception' in landmark victory for religious freedom

    01/11/2012 4:52:22 PM PST · by NYer · 6 replies · 1+ views
    Catholic Culture ^ | January 11, 2012 | Diogenes
    In a landmark January 11 decision, the US Supreme Court ruled that religious bodies should set their own standards for hiring ministers, free from government interference. The unanimous decision in the case of Hosanna-Tabor Evangelical Lutheran Church v. EEOC was described by Douglas Laycock, who successfully argued the case before the high court, as a “huge win for religious liberty.” The Hosanna-Tabor case was the result of a discrimination lawsuit, filed by a woman who claimed that she had been wrongly dismissed by the Michigan Lutheran congregation. The Supreme Court ruled the congregation was exempt from such an anti-discrimination suit....
  • Supreme Court delivers a knockout punch to the White House

    01/11/2012 2:39:31 PM PST · by americanophile · 135 replies
    Fox News ^ | Peter Johnson Jr.
    Wednesday the United States Supreme Court delivered a knockout blow to the White House in the cause of religious liberty. Chief Justice John Roberts, writing for a unanimous court swatted away the government’s claim that the Lutheran Church did not have the right to fire a “minister of religion” who, after six years of Lutheran religious training had been commissioned as a minister, upon election by her congregation. The fired minister -- who also taught secular subjects -- claimed discrimination in employment. The Obama administration, always looking for opportunities to undermine the bedrock of First Amendment religious liberty, eagerly agreed....
  • Republicans Push Pro-Zygote Extremism Over the Top (Über Hurl Warning!)

    01/10/2012 11:39:20 PM PST · by 2ndDivisionVet · 8 replies
    Womens News ^ | January 11, 2012 | Nancy L. Cohen
    Nancy L. Cohen says the roster of GOP presidential contenders is bringing 40 years of sexual counter-revolution to a crescendo. The party's rightwing social agenda is so secure it barely merits any mention. Perhaps if the pill had not been invented, the race for the Republican presidential nomination would be going very differently. In case you missed it, Mitt Romney serendipitously scored a rare laugh in a debate leading up to Tuesday's New Hampshire primary when he waved away a question about states outlawing birth control. "Contraception; it's working fine," he said. "Leave it alone." If only we could take...
  • A weak defense of EPA

    01/10/2012 8:11:44 AM PST · by WilliamIII · 21 replies
    Scotusblog ^ | Jan 9 2012 | Lyle Denniston
    With a federal government lawyer conceding almost every criticism leveled at the way the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency compels landowners to avoid polluting the nation’s waterways, the Supreme Court on Monday seemed well on its way toward finding some way to curb that agency’s enforcement powers. Their task was made easier as Deputy U.S. Solicitor General Malcolm L. Stewart stopped just short of saying that EPA was just as heavy-handed as its adversaries — and several of the Justices — were saying. Perhaps the most telling example: when several of the Justices expressed alarm that a homeowner targeted by EPA’s...
  • 27 Members Of Congress Call On SCOTUS To Strike Down ObamaCare

    01/09/2012 6:43:58 PM PST · by ElIguana · 7 replies
    America's Conservative News ^ | 01/09/2012 | America's Conservative News
    Should we call this a case of Congress asking the Court to do what Congress has failed to do? A bold move from our elected officials or are our members of Congress just passing the buck?
  • Supreme Court to hear union dues case Tuesday

    01/09/2012 3:57:34 PM PST · by Miami Vice · 8 replies
    Legal News Line ^ | 1-9-12 | MICHAEL P. TREMOGLIE
    The U.S. Supreme Court will hear the appeal of eight California non-union civil servants over an assessment they say the Service Employees International Union wrongly collected from them. An attorney for the National Right to Work Legal Foundation is making the oral argument Jan. 10 for the plaintiffs in Knox v. SEIU Local 1000. In 2005, Local 1000 officials...
  • Supreme Court to hear union dues case Tuesday

    01/09/2012 3:57:22 PM PST · by Miami Vice · 10 replies
    Legal News Line ^ | 1-9-12 | MICHAEL P. TREMOGLIE
    The U.S. Supreme Court will hear the appeal of eight California non-union civil servants over an assessment they say the Service Employees International Union wrongly collected from them. An attorney for the National Right to Work Legal Foundation is making the oral argument Jan. 10 for the plaintiffs in Knox v. SEIU Local 1000. In 2005, Local 1000 officials...
  • Justices criticize EPA’s dealings with Idaho homeowners

    01/09/2012 10:26:29 AM PST · by WilliamIII · 88 replies · 10+ views
    WASHINGTON — Several Supreme Court justices are criticizing the Environmental Protection Agency for heavy-handed enforcement of rules affecting homeowners. The justices were considering whether to let a North Idaho couple challenge an EPA order identifying their land as “protected wetlands.” Mike and Chantell Sackett of Priest Lake wanted to build their house on the land. But the EPA says the Sacketts can’t challenge the order to restore the land to wetlands or face thousands of dollars in fines. Justice Samuel Alito called EPA’s actions “outrageous.” Justice Antonin Scalia noted the “high-handedness of the agency” in dealing with private property. Chief...
  • Capital lawyer to have Supreme moment (property rights case)

    01/08/2012 2:55:35 PM PST · by WilliamIII · 4 replies
    Sacramento Bee ^ | January 8, 2012 | Michael Doyle
    WASHINGTON – Sacramento attorney Damien Schiff will be carrying the conservative flame Monday when the Supreme Court considers what could become the year's hottest environmental case. For the 32-year-old Schiff, a senior staff attorney with the Pacific Legal Foundation, the hourlong oral argument marks a personal milestone. The Monday morning session will be his first appearance before the famously aggressive questioners of the nation's highest court. "There is a greater intensity of preparation," Schiff acknowledged Thursday, following a moot court session at Georgetown University Law Center. "Everyone knows that (an attorney) is lucky to have 30 seconds to make their...
  • What If Obama Loses? Imagining the consequences of a GOP victory (Bucket required)

    01/07/2012 9:59:19 PM PST · by 2ndDivisionVet · 19 replies
    The Washington Monthly ^ | The January/ February 2012 Issue | The Editors
    It’s a common complaint—we’ve certainly made it over the years—that too much political campaign coverage focuses on the horse race. The packed debate schedule in the current GOP nomination battle has put a bit more focus than usual on the substance of what the candidates are saying, which is good. But even so, most of this coverage has wound up being about whether a given policy position might help or hurt a candidate’s chances of winning. What’s most important has been left largely unexamined: if one of these candidates actually becomes president and advances his or her policies, what would...
  • The McCreery v. Somerville Funeral – Maskell And Gray To Attend – Minor v. Happersett To Preside.

    01/07/2012 5:24:30 PM PST · by Danae · 29 replies
    Natural Born Citizen Blog ^ | 1-7-2012 | Leo Donofrio Esq.
    Grab a cup of java, put your thinking caps on, kick back and relax. We are going to be here for a while. Focus. Below, you will be privy to a true and proper revision of United States Supreme Court history. One of the foundational building blocks for Justice Gray’s opinion in U.S. v. Wong Kim Ark is the case, McCreery v. Somerville, 22 US 354 (1824), to which Gray made a fatally flawed assumption based upon his failure to acknowledge a judicially recognized misquote. Then, Justice Gray compounded his initial error by creating a separately deceptive quotation. These errors...
  • Predicting Obama-Clinton squeaks by Romney-Ryan (With help fron Ron Paul)

    01/07/2012 9:10:15 AM PST · by 2ndDivisionVet · 3 replies
    The Iowa City Press-Citizen | January 6, 2012 | Bruce Wheaton
    Link only, due to copyright issues: http://www.press-citizen.com/article/20120107/OPINION01/301070021/Predicting-Obama-Clinton-squeaks-by-Romney-Ryan?odyssey=nav%7Chead
  • Four reasons to not sit this election out

    01/02/2012 6:50:14 PM PST · by EveningStar · 74 replies · 1+ views
    January 2, 2012
    In case you were planning to sit this one out... Ruth Bader Ginsburg - 78 years old Antonin Scalia - 75 years old Anthony Kennedy - 75 years old Stephen Breyer - 73 years old If you're wondering about the others: Clarence Thomas - 63 years old Samuel Alito - 61 years old Sonia Sotomayor - 57 years old John Roberts - 56 years old Elena Kagan - 51 years old And of course there are unknown factors not related to age.
  • Chief Justice Roberts: Back off the recusal demands

    01/02/2012 7:47:14 AM PST · by SeekAndFind · 36 replies
    Hotair ^ | 01/02/2012 | Ed Morrissey
    Has anyone taken the demands for the recusals of Supreme Court justices on the ObamaCare case seriously? As I’ve written previously, they’re not offered seriously, but as a way of shaping the post-decision political battlefield, efforts that have begun on both sides of the issue. Chief Justice John Roberts told both sides to back off in his annual report to the federal judiciary: The chief justice’s comments came in his annual report on the state of the federal judiciary. In it, he made what amounted to a vigorous defense of Justices Clarence Thomas and Elena Kagan, who are facing calls...
  • Chief Justice Roberts Defends Kagan, Thomas Hearing Health Care Case

    12/31/2011 8:24:14 PM PST · by Nachum · 73 replies
    Pat Dollard ^ | 12/31/11 | New York Times
    In the face of a growing controversy over whether two Supreme Court justices should disqualify themselves from the challenge to the 2010 health care overhaul law, Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. on Saturday defended the court’s ethical standards. The chief justice’s comments came in his annual report on the state of the federal judiciary. In it, he made what amounted to a vigorous defense of Justices Clarence Thomas and Elena Kagan, who are facing calls to disqualify themselves from hearing the health care case, which will be argued over three days in late March. He did not, however, mention...
  • Chief justice defends court's impartiality

    12/31/2011 6:02:54 PM PST · by SmithL · 17 replies · 1+ views
    Associated Press ^ | 12/31/11 | ANNE FLAHERTY
    WASHINGTON (AP) -- Chief Justice John Roberts said Saturday that he has "complete confidence" in his colleagues' ability to step away from cases where their personal interests are at stake, and noted that judges should not be swayed by "partisan demands." The comment, included in Roberts' year-end report, comes after lawmakers demanded that two Justices recuse themselves from the high court's review of President Barack Obama's health care law aimed at extending coverage to more than 30 million people. Republicans want Justice Elena Kagan off the case because of her work in the Obama administration as solicitor general, whereas Democrats...
  • Duluth City Council takes stand against 'corporate personhood' ruling

    12/31/2011 11:23:42 AM PST · by WOBBLY BOB · 8 replies
    pioneer press ^ | 12-31-11 | Peter Passi
    Duluth made history last week when it became the first city in the state to pass a resolution in support of a constitutional amendment that would essentially overturn a U.S. Supreme Court decision, namely Citizens United vs. the Federal Election Commission. The court ruled in 2010 that corporations are entitled to the same constitutional rights as individual U.S. citizens. A majority of justices also concluded that political spending was a form of free speech and that corporations should be able to spend an unlimited sum of money to influence voters, without disclosing financial details of their activities. Although Duluth is...