Supreme Court won't hear challenge to DC Metro ban on religious ads

The Hill ^ | 04 06 2020 | Harper Neidig

[yesthatjallen]

The Supreme Court on Monday said it would not take up the Catholic church's challenge to the Washington, D.C., transit authority's policy banning religious ads, allowing the policy to remain in place.

The Archdiocese of Washington had sued the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority (WMATA) after the agency refused to run one of its Christmas ads, alleging that the policy violates the First Amendment.

The case appeared to be an attractive one for the court's conservative wing, but with Justice Brett Kavanaugh recusing himself from consideration of the case because he was involved as an appeals court judge, the faction lacked the necessary four votes to grant the Archdiocese's petition.

Justice Neil Gorsuch issued a dissent, joined by Justice Clarence Thomas, arguing that WMATA's policy is "viewpoint discrimination by a governmental entity and a violation of the First Amendment," noting that the agency ran more secular Christmas-themed ads.

"The Constitution requires the government to respect religious speech, not to maximize advertising revenues," Gorsuch wrote. "So if WMATA finds messages like the one here intolerable, it may close its buses to all advertisements. More modestly, it might restrict advertisement space to subjects where religious viewpoints are less likely to arise without running afoul of our free speech precedents."

SNIP

[Buckeye McFrog]

Disturbing. But likely temporary as Kavanaugh had to do the ethical thing.

[Ouchthatonehurt]

Not permitted... Permitted...

[teeman8r]

if government monies are being used to run the busses, then the ads of all peoples must be run... there is no separation of church or state.

[RideForever]

I guess my question is this -

If Catholic charities can exist in the non-secular world as an NGO (non-govt org), which is semi-commercial, why can’t they also advertise on a bus ad? As long as the bus ads are competitively priced, what’s the beef?

Ans: Democrat-appointed judges.

[teeman8r]

if government monies are being used to run the busses, then the ads of all peoples must be run... there is no separation of church or state.

[TexasGunLover]

.. there is no separation of church or state.

No law exists related to separation of church and state in the United States. Only establishment of religion is discussed.

[Dogbert41]

sometimes God does Judge a country...

[Buckeye McFrog]

I suspect some similar case will come along where Kavanaugh was not involved and they’ll take it to achieve the same result.

[JohnBovenmyer]

Since they only needed 4 votes for cert the recusal can’t be the only thing that blocked it. Either Alito and/or Roberts declined to take the case. Article doesn’t specify.

[JimRed]

Are there the same restrictions on Islam?