Philadelphia Violated Catholic Foster Agency's Rights, U.S. Supreme Court Rules

NBC10 ^ | 06-17-2021 | NBC10

[TexasGurl24]

The Supreme Court unanimously overturned a lower court ruling that allowed the City of Philadelphia to ban Catholic Social Services from participating in the city's foster care program, saying the city violated the organization's First Amendment rights.

[TexasGurl24]

There are 5 votes for overruling Smith, but 2 of those 5 didn’t want to do it here in this case.

[rdl6989]

“This decision might as well be written on the dissolving paper sold in magic shops,” Alito wrote. “The City has been adamant about pressuring CSS to give in, and if the City wants to get around today’s decision, it can simply eliminate the never-used exemption power.”

https://www.cnbc.com/2021/06/17/supreme-court-sides-with-catholic-adoption-agency-that-refuses-to-work-with-lgbt-couples.html

[aimhigh]

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/19-123_g3bi.pdf

[TexasGurl24]

That would only be a temporary win for the City if they try.

Barrett and Kavanaugh want to get rid of Smith as well. They just weren’t sure how to replace it.

So Barrett, Kavanaugh, Gorsuch, Thomas and Alito would strike down Smith in a case with different facts. (Baker or photographer come to mind.)

[xzins]

Evidently it makes sense for parents’ wills to specify who or what agency can foster their children

[Honest Nigerian]

In light of this case involving CATHOLIC Social Services - How long until someone starts yelling about how many of the SC Justices are Catholics? It is quite strange ....
(In spite of my prior posts voicing opposition to Catholic theology, I am not attempting to justify those by this post. Merely wondering about when the winds of cancel culture will shift more strongly.)

[Alberta's Child]

From the start of this case I didn’t see it as a solid one for religious freedom. The biggest problem I saw from the start is that the dispute involves adoption services that were contracted through a government agency at PUBLIC expense.

Any religious organization worth a damn would carry out its mission without holding out its hand for money from Caesar.

[zeugma]

Thanks for linking directly to the opinion. I haven’t read through any of it but the Syllabus yet. The break out on the justices was interesting...

ROBERTS , C. J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which BREYER,
SOTOMAYOR, KAGAN, KAVANAUGH, and BARRETT, JJ., joined. BARRETT, J.,
filed a concurring opinion, in which KAVANAUGH, J., joined, and in which
BREYER, J., joined as to all but the first paragraph. ALITO, J., filed an
opinion concurring in the judgment, in which THOMAS and GORSUCH, JJ.,
joined. GORSUCH, J., filed an opinion concurring in the judgment, in
which THOMAS and ALITO, JJ., joined.

[zeugma]

Any religious organization worth a damn would carry out its mission without holding out its hand for money from Caesar.

The problem with that position, is the the state actively denies the ability to carry out that mission. They will send men with guns to kill anyone who attempts to help widows and orphans without the explicit permission of the State.

In order to even attempt to perform their mission, they must bow to Caesar. This particular win will last about a week. A small wording change will effectively ban them again, and they'll be forced back into court.

[Alberta's Child]

The problem with that position, is the the state actively denies the ability to carry out that mission.

That's not true in this case. Nobody is saying a religious organization can't be involved in foster-care situations (the Amish probably do this all the time). In the Philadelphia case, the city tried to exclude these religious organizations from CITY-RUN and CITY-FUNDED foster care arrangements.

Call me a heartless bastard if you will, but anyone involved in foster care who collects taxpayer money for the kids they house isn't really exercising true Christian charity.