Reading the Court’s signals on same-sex marriage

Supreme Court: Was same-sex marriage settled in 1972 case?

Pro-life group asks Supreme Court to allow ‘Choose Life’ license plates

Constitution check: Will there be more Obama appointees on the Supreme Court?

Rearranging the Clerk’s office

Supreme Court has opportunity to take up marriage case

Q&A: Why Hahn family is glad they joined Hobby Lobby to fight Obamacare’s HHS mandate

Virginia joins in urging same-sex marriage review

Utah, Virginia, Oklahoma appeal same-sex ‘marriage’ rulings to U.S. Supreme Court

Attorney General Pam Bondi: Let the U.S. Supreme Court decide same-sex marriage, not Florida courts

Three states file appeals with U.S. Supreme Court over same-sex marriage

Both sides in same-sex marriage fight agree: Justices must act

U.S. Supreme Court justices asked to review Oklahoma’s marriage law

Utah appeals to U.S. Supreme Court in marriage case

Is there a Federal Constitutional right to same-sex marriage? SCOTUS answered that question in 1972

For Ginsburg, a human being isn’t a RFRA “person” either

Justice Ginsburg on the five male Jusices’ “blind spot” in Hobby Lobby, and the influence of daughters on their fathers

Ruth Bader Ginsburg accuses pro-Hobby Lobby SCOTUS judges of having a blind spot towards women

Casey Mattox talks religious liberty in the context of Hobby Lobby/Conestoga (video)

Gilbert church receives a sign from (close to) heaven

Appeals court says Texas DMV violated First Amendment

Becket Fund law firm gaining a reputation as powerhouse after Hobby Lobby win

Propaganda war continues in Hobby Lobby aftermath

Summary procedures in the Supreme Court compared to courts of appeals

Supreme Court blocks recognition of Utah same-sex marriages

Same-sex marriage stirs backlash as businesses assert religion

High court decision gives pro-life advocates breathing room

Courts rule on vanity plates in TX, NC

North Carolina asks Supreme Court to allow sale of Choose Life license plates

Utah asks Supreme Court to put same-sex marriage recognition order on hold

North Carolina lawmakers stand by ‘Choose Life’ plates

North Carolina legislative leaders ask Supreme Court review decision barring production of “Choose Life” license plates

Supreme Court petitioned to affirm state’s rights to issue ‘Choose Life’ license plates

DOJ set to support overturning of marriage laws in Supreme Court

NC asks US Supreme Court to affirm right to issue ‘Choose Life’ license plates

Americans view Supreme Court more favorably after Hobby Lobby decision

Academic highlight: Measuring the circuits’ success in the Supreme Court

Religious freedom cases to fill Supreme Court docket

Nebraska judge says it’s time for Supreme Court to ‘shut up’

Angry mob takes to Twitter to scream at SCOTUSBlog for Hobby Lobby decision

Supreme Court will hear church’s challenge to Gilbert’s sign ordinance

Supreme Court will hear Gilbert church-sign case

Gov’t officials clash with church over signs advertising worship services – and the case could become the next important religious freedom battle

American pro-life campaigners free to stand for what they believe in

Supreme Court takes case on church free speech rights

SCOTUS to hear case involving Gilbert sign ordinance

A quiet grandmother wins one for free speech at the Supreme Court

US Supreme Court agrees to take up govt speech discrimination against churches

Final Stat Pack for October Term 2013 and key takeaways

This 77-year-old Grandma got the Supreme Court to uphold pro-life free speech

Big news report card: Grading abortion buffer zone coverage

New Hampshire buffer zone law under spotlight

What is left of Hill v. Colorado?

US Supreme Court unanimous in striking down Mass. anti-speech buffer zone

US Supreme Court strikes down Mass. anti-speech buffer zone

Supreme Court rejects Wisconsin appeal over abortion law

The Supreme Court’s other shoe

    The Washington Times: When the Supreme Court ruled last year in United States v. Windsor that Section 3 of the federal Defense of Marriage Act was unconstitutional, it announced that its “opinion and its holding are confined” to those couples “joined in same-sex marriages made lawful by the State.” Because the definition and regulation of marriage has almost exclusively been within the province of the States, the Court noted repeatedly, it violated equal protection for the federal government not to give the same recognition to same-sex marriages sanctioned by a particular state that it gave to heterosexual marriages. On that reasoning, States that choose a different policy judgment about marriage, one that would preserve marriage as an institution between one man and one woman, should remain free to do so.


  • Posted: 06/19/2014
  • |
  • Category: Bench & Bar
  • |
  • Source: www.washingtontimes.com

  • Tags: , , , ,

Supreme Court: 1st Amend. protects speech on matters of public concern outside workplace

Scalia’s very, very, very rare dissent: Court should have reviewed school graduation case

A guide to the Supreme Court’s remaining cases

Fourteen cases remain for Supreme Court

Elmbrook and religion as ‘hazardous waste’

What we can expect from the Supreme Court next month

SCOTUS Stat Pack, October 2013

ADF to America: Public prayer is OK, secularist threats empty

After ruling, Dillsboro, North Carolina to open sessions with prayer