Free Republic

You need the First Amendment precisely when your ideas offend others or flout the majority’s orthodoxies. And then it protects more than your freedom to speak your mind; it guards your freedom not to speak the mind of another. Thus, in classic “compelled speech” rulings, the Supreme Court has protected the right not to be forced to say, do or create anything expressing a message one rejects. Most famously, in West Virginia v. Barnette (1943), it barred a state from denying Jehovah’s Witnesses the right to attend public schools if they refused to salute the flag. In Wooley v. Maynard...

On Monday, the U.S. Supreme Court handed down its ruling in Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission. While the decision ends an almost six-year legal battle, a new journey begins. This nation stands at the proverbial fork in the road. One path will lead us closer to a society controlled by hostility — one in which those who hold the dominant view in society will use government as a weapon to punish individuals who fail to adopt the prevailing orthodoxy. The other path will move us toward a truly tolerant society — one with room for individuals who believe,...

Progressives in the media have no respect for the traditions and structure of the branches of the government. As soon as one issues a decision based on anything but liberal ideology, the world is over. After the Supreme Court released their decision in the case of Masterpiece Cakeshop LTD. vs. Colorado Civil Rights Commission, in favor of the baker, Jack Phillips, the media went on a rampage. Liberal book publisher Haymarket Books tweeted out on its verified account almost immediately after the ruling was released, “Abolish the Supreme Court.”

Tolerance, it appears, is not a one-way street. Since the rise of the gay-marriage movement, it has become fashionable to decry dissenters as haters and bigots, to attempt to write them out of polite society in the same way that the larger American body politic has rightfully rejected the Klan. Politicians thunder against Christian bigots. Media organizations put the words “religious liberty” in scare quotes, as if the expression of deeply held religious beliefs is a mere pretext, used to conceal darker motivations. And ideologues in state agencies give full vent to their rage, mocking faithful Christians as if they...

Although the United States Supreme Court ruled in favor of Colorado Christian baker Jack Phillips, the court did not definitively rule whether baking a cake for a same-sex wedding constitutes speech and still leaves questions about how other cases involving Christian business owners and same-sex weddings will play out, lawyers say. The nation's high court ruled 7-2 on Monday in favor of the owner of Masterpiece Cakeshop in Lakewood, who faced backlash from the Colorado government after he refused to bake a cake for a gay wedding in 2012. Although Phillips' six-year legal battle has seemingly come to an end,...

The Supreme Court granted a limited victory Monday to a Colorado baker who refused to make a cake for a same-sex couple, finding the state showed fierce hostility toward his Christian beliefs when it ruled he broke the law with his refusal. The 7-2 decision sends the case back to Colorado with firm instructions to give Jack Phillips, the Christian baker, a fair hearing. But the ruling does not establish a First Amendment right to refuse services to same-sex couples, as Mr. Phillips and his conservative backers had hoped. Instead it suggests a road map for states such as Colorado,...

The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday handed a narow victory to a Christian baker from Colorado who refused for religious reasons to make a wedding cake for a gay couple.

"Whatever the confluence of speech and free exercise principles might be in some cases, the Colorado Civil Rights Commission's consideration of this case was inconsistent with the State's obligation of religious neutrality. The reason and motive for the baker's refusal were based on his sincere religious beliefs and convictions." link to decision https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/17pdf/16-111_j4el.pdf

The president's lawyer Rudy Giuliani threatened a legal battle with special counsel Robert Mueller if he attempts to subpoena Donald Trump. "If Mueller tries to subpoena us, we're going to court," Giuliani told ABC News. His latest comments come on the heels of the publication of a 20-page confidential letter sent by Trump's lawyers to Mueller arguing that the president cannot legally obstruct justice in the Russia investigation due to his position as "chief law enforcement officer." "It remains our position that the President's actions here, by virtue of his position as the chief law enforcement officer, could neither constitutionally...

hen, just weeks after taking office, Donald Trump nominated Neil Gorsuch to the supreme court, the newly minted US president made good on a central promise of his campaign: to replace the late justice Antonin Scalia with a bona fide conservative. That moment foreshadowed what is shaping up to be among the most indelible of Trump’s triumphs – the reshaping of the federal judiciary with the appointment of dozens of judges with an ideological bent toward the administration’s agenda. Republicans are working with Trump to make a record-breaking number of appointments to federal courts. These new, mostly young, white men...

. The Supreme Court on Tuesday allowed Arkansas to enforce a law restricting medication abortions, rejecting an appeal from the Planned Parenthood affiliate in the state. Planned Parenthood had asked the high court to review an appeals court ruling on the abortion pill rules and reinstate a lower court order that had blocked them from taking effect. The law in question says doctors who provide abortion pills must hold a contract with another physician who has admitting privileges at a hospital, and would agree to handle and treat complications. The 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals had reversed a court...

COLLINS v. VIRGINIA 292 Va. 486, 790 S.E. 2d 611, reversed and remanded. Opinion [Sotomayor] Concurrence [Thomas] Dissent [Alito] Syllabus SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES Collins v. Virginia certiorari to the supreme court of virginia No. 16-1027. Argued January 9, 2018-Decided May 29, 2018 During the investigation of two traffic incidents involving an orange and black motorcycle with an extended frame, Officer David Rhodes learned that the motorcycle likely was stolen and in the possession of petitioner Ryan Collins. Officer Rhodes discovered photographs on Collins' Facebook profile of an orange and black motorcycle parked in the driveway of a...

- snip - Knick, who purchased the farm in 1970 to raise horses, denies Vail ever personally spoke to her. She claims she first caught wind of the issue in 2008, when it was was being discussed at public meetings. The Vails, she noted Monday, are “politically connected” in the area. In 2012, Scott Township supervisors passed an ordinance that in essence granted public access to private cemeteries during daylight hours; landowners could be fined $300 to $600 per day if they didn’t comply. J. David Breemer, an attorney with Pacific Legal Foundation representing Knick, said Scott Township’s action is...

I think Yahoo or Rueters is link only. Bottom line: a contract willingly signed by an employee to eschew class-actions suits is actually a contract willingly signed by an employee to eschew class-actions suits.

.Like clockwork, Washington has whipped itself into a frenzy over rumors of a possible retirement on the Supreme Court. All eyes are on Justice Anthony Kennedy, 81, who reportedly considered calling it quits last spring. As the court’s current term winds to a close, speculation about his plans has again swept the capital, with court watchers searching for clues.

On Monday, a divided Supreme Court said a court in a Louisiana murder case couldn’t accept a lawyer’s admission of his own client’s guilt over his client’s objections. In McCoy v. Louisiana, the Court considered a basic question about the proper role of attorneys in murder cases. Robert McCoy originally filed his own appeal directly to the Supreme Court about two questions related to his conviction on three murder charges. McCoy was sentenced to death in the case. McCoy was accused of killing three people in 2008 in a dispute with his then-wife and he was arrested after fleeing to...

The Supreme Court ruled 6-3 to strike down the Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act (PAPSA) that outlawed sports gambling in most states.From Fox News: The 1992 law had barred gambling on football, basketball, baseball and other sports with some exceptions, like allowing people to wager on a single game only in Nevada. The Supreme Court ruling now gives states the go-ahead to legalize sports betting if they want."The legalization of sports gambling requires an important policy choice, but the choice is not ours to make," the opinion by Justice Samuel Alito said."Congress can regulate sports gambling directly, but if...

By a 6-3 margin, the U.S. Supreme Court has struck down the Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act, which paves the way for legalized nationwide sports gambling. States can now decide on their own if they want to offer gambling within their borders. But which states will offer gambling, and when? That’s a trickier question. Even in the best-case scenario, it’ll still be several weeks before you can make legal bets – and that’s in states where gambling bills have already passed through the appropriate state legislatures. If your state hasn’t even started considering the possibility of legalized gambling, it...

The 10th Amendment provides that, if the Constitution does not either give a power to the federal government or take that power away from the states, that power is reserved for the states or the people themselves. The Supreme Court has long interpreted this provision to bar the federal government from “commandeering” the states to enforce federal laws or policies. Today the justices ruled that a federal law that bars states from legalizing sports betting violates the anti-commandeering doctrine. Their decision not only opens the door for states around the country to allow sports betting, but it also could give...

The Supreme Court on Monday struck down a federal law that bars gambling on football, basketball, baseball and other sports in most states, giving states the go-ahead to legalize betting on sports. The Supreme Court ruled 6-3 to strike down the Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act. The 1992 law barred state-authorized sports gambling with some exceptions. It made Nevada the only state where a person could wager on the results of a single game.