Espinoza v. Montana Department of Revenue: The Supreme Court leaves more Questions than Answers in State Educational Choice Programs

By: Ken Jensen In Espinoza v. Montana Department of Revenue, 207 L. Ed. 2d 679 (2020), the U.S. Supreme Court held that if a state offers an educational choice program, it cannot bar a religious schools based solely on their religious character. Over fifteen years ago, the Court had held that the Establishment Clause did … Continue reading Espinoza v. Montana Department of Revenue: The Supreme Court leaves more Questions than Answers in State Educational Choice Programs

Qualified Immunity—The Ultimate Circular Legal Doctrine

By: Katie Wotherspoon In the wake of numerous murders of Black Americans at the hands of law enforcement, a nationwide debate exploded regarding structural racism and police accountability—the legal doctrine of qualified immunity in particular, amassed much of the scrutiny. The killings not only sparked national outrage they were also met with vehement protests in … Continue reading Qualified Immunity—The Ultimate Circular Legal Doctrine

Census Watch 2020: The Constitutionality of a Citizenship Question

By: Monet Valdez The United States Supreme Court is the most powerful judiciary body in our nation. Nine Justices sit atop the high court and make decisions that become the law of the land. The Court recently decided whether or not to add a citizenship question to the 2020 Census. It is important that we … Continue reading Census Watch 2020: The Constitutionality of a Citizenship Question

The First Amendment: Has it been Weaponized?

By:  Robert Bryson Shortly after the Citizens United and Janus decisions, detractors began heaping criticism upon the Supreme Court for “weaponizing” the First Amendment. Indeed, Justice Kagan makes that very argument in her dissent: “It [the majority] does so by weaponizing the First Amendment, in a way that unleashes judges, now and in the future, … Continue reading The First Amendment: Has it been Weaponized?

Corporate Personhood: Can a corporation really hold religious views? How did we get here?

By:  Robert Bryson Corporate personhood is the legal notion that a corporation is a distinct entity that exists separately from the human being associated with it (like owners, managers, and employees). Corporations got their first breath of life in the Justinian Digest (the latest iteration of the Roman Code). Pope Innocent IV (pontificate from 1243-54) … Continue reading Corporate Personhood: Can a corporation really hold religious views? How did we get here?

PIAC Gun Control Series: Who can Create Gun Control Regulations

By:  Ridgeway Woulfe We’ve addressed the need for a change in how America approaches gun violence.  We’ve addressed some options for reducing gun violence.  Now, we address WHO can take these steps.  America has placed the most attention upon the federal government.  Indeed, the federal government has the best ability to take the needed steps … Continue reading PIAC Gun Control Series: Who can Create Gun Control Regulations

PIAC’s Supreme Court Review: Epic Systems Corp. v. Lewis

By:  Ken Jensen “[A]s matter of law the answer is clear. In the Federal Arbitration Act, Congress has instructed federal courts to enforce arbitration agreements according to their terms—including terms providing for individualized proceedings.”  Epic Sys. Corp. v. Lewis, 138 S. Ct. 1612, 1619 (2018)   The Supreme Court thus continued to enforce arbitration agreements consistent … Continue reading PIAC’s Supreme Court Review: Epic Systems Corp. v. Lewis

Supreme Court Promotes a Double Standard for Religious Animus: Muslims to Christians

By:  Ridgeway Woulfe Last week, we explored the double standard the Supreme Court created by its Masterpiece Cake and its decision to uphold Trump’s nation-based immigration ban (apparently not a Muslim ban, as he routinely stated).  In Masterpiece Cake, the Supreme Court held that a Commission’s animus toward a Christian baker was enough to find … Continue reading Supreme Court Promotes a Double Standard for Religious Animus: Muslims to Christians

Supreme Court Promotes a Double Standard for Religious Animus: Presidents to State Commissions

By:  Ken Jensen In her dissent to the majority opinion upholding Trump’s travel ban, Justice Sotomayor identifies a compelling contradiction with the Court’s previous opinion regarding gay wedding cakes.  In Masterpiece Cakeshop, Ltd. v. Colorado Civil Rights Comm'n, the Court decided whether a baker could refuse to design or bake a cake for a same-sex … Continue reading Supreme Court Promotes a Double Standard for Religious Animus: Presidents to State Commissions

PIAC’s Supreme Court Review: Masterpiece Cake, Ltd. v. Colorado Civil Rights Comm’n.

By: Ken Jensen After reading the Court’s opinion in Masterpiece Cakeshop, Ltd. v. Colorado Civil Rights Comm'n, 138 S. Ct. 1719 (2018), I am struck with how our society is still confused with respect to sexual orientation.  The Court struck down the Colorado Civil Rights Commission’s actions to assess a cakeshop owner’s reasons for declining … Continue reading PIAC’s Supreme Court Review: Masterpiece Cake, Ltd. v. Colorado Civil Rights Comm’n.