Supreme Court rules in favor of Catholic foster agency 1

Supreme Court rules in favor of Catholic foster agency

 

The Supreme Court on Thursday said that Philadelphia violated the First Amendment when it froze the contract of a Catholic foster care agency that refused to work with same-sex couples as potential foster parents because the agency believes that marriage should be between a man and a woman.
The dispute arose because Catholic Social Services — which was receiving taxpayer funds — was unwilling to work with LGBTQ couples as foster parents out of religious objections to same sex marriage. The policy was brought to the attention of the city in 2018 after inquiries from a local newspaper, and soon after the government put a freeze on the contract. The group, led by long-time foster parent Sharonell Fulton who has fostered more than 40 children over 25 years, brought suit.
The issue before the court was whether Philadelphia could require foster agencies to comply with its non-discrimination law.
READ: Supreme Court opinion in same-sex couple foster care agency case
READ: Supreme Court opinion in same-sex couple foster care agency case
Chief Justice John Roberts wrote the majority opinion for six of the nine justices. Justices Thomas, Alito and Neil Gorsuch joined in the result, but did not join the majority's rationale — and was disappointed at the result.
"The Court has emitted a wisp of a decision that leaves religious liberty in a confused and vulnerable state," Alito wrote. "Those who count on this Court to stand up for the First Amendment have every right to be disappointed — as am I."
Alito would have gone much further overruling decades old precedent and making it much more difficult for the government to enforce laws that burden some individuals' religious beliefs.
They said they would have overturned a 1990 case that said that if a legal requirement applied equally to everyone, even if it burdened religious practice, it was constitutional as long as the government had a rational basis for the law.
"Today's decision is another victory for religious groups, but not the major one that they sought," said Steve Vladeck, CNN Supreme Court analyst and professor at the University of Texas School of Law.
"The court's three most conservative justices wanted to overturn three decades of precedent and subject virtually all government regulations that even incidentally impact religious practice to the most exacting judicial scrutiny. But Chief Justice Roberts and Justices Kavanaugh and Barrett appeared unwilling, or at least not yet ready, to make such a move — resting the decision on narrower grounds," he added. "That may also explain why none of the three more progressive justices dissented — lest they encourage the three justices in the middle to go bigger."

#JessciaSchneider #CNN #News

57 comments

  1. If you’re a same sex couple why would you go to catholic foster agency? I’m an atheist I wouldn’t go there either.

    1. @Christian CASTANE you can but it’s pointless right? The Bible is pretty clear about homosexuality but I guess they ignore that part huh

    2. @God Bear The better question to ask would be should they be forced to hire a black person just to fill a racial quota that is being imposed on them?

    3. @Jon Ammons lmao it’s kids without homes an bigotry ? How so . So far it’s , drug addicts leaving kids at church’s or drug addicts selling kids off for money . Where you from, fantasy land ? You just make up some new narrative to fit your point . Again the only reason this is being talked about is because of gay pride month … you won’t ever hear about this again ever ! But keep up the good fight for people that don’t care and the church’s will still be funded and guess who will take in these orphans cause nobody else is ??.? Round and round we go buddy

    1. @kale n That is absolutely not true. People are fired all the time for behavior that takes place away from their jobs!

      The Bachelor guy was fired for tweeting that the girl should be shown grace… He was definitely not working at the time, yet Bachelor and the network fired him.

      People get fired everyday for things that took place while not at work.

    2. @BK Lee absolutely. This dude be like, ” You can’t fire that teacher for banging kids.” He wasn’t teaching at the time. Durrr

    3. @Dan Levan The added “durrr” at the end made me crack up. People will defend anyone for anything if they agree with them politically. Durrr.

    4. @TheU2001 MIA Poor effort e-boy. Your attempted insult lost its effect in the 1990s. Come join the new millennium and meet people in person. You might even be able to eventually make a real human friend. Good luck. I am pulling for you. (This is called a complimentary “layup” to help you become more clever.

    5. @William Miller No reason to be upset. It is your month after all. You be you. Brian Stelter approves

    1. @Lady Lulu If we are all sinners than why are Christians so judgmental when it comes to politics ? That whole love your enemy thing appears to be ignored.

    2. @10th letter discrimination is bigotry. blocking someone from an activity based on their sexual orientation is discrimination. Plain and simple.

    3. @Optimistic Outreach the supreme court interprets the constitution. Every ruling they hand down is explicitly their opinion, which is why later courts can overrule earlier decisions.

    1. @Lex Ruptor A child needs a male and female role model. If you can’t have children normally its wyestionable.

    2. @Debra Johnson then send em back home to their parents and get rid of foster agencies… This is the stupidest crap I heard. These chindren are coming from homes with moms and dads.

    3. @jim bob No current and moral. Kids get things from a male and female. You need both to live a rounded life.

  2. I see a bunch of angry adults who oppose the Constitution of the United States, because it protects Christians; no more no less. Ever heard of immoral laws??? Remember all the Segregation Laws which people had to fallow or go to jail??? Guess what got that abolished?? The Constitution of the United States and the Supreme Court.
    — Soon CNN will be angry that there is a Supreme Court.

  3. Okay well then if that’s the case we need civil oversight agencies funded by federal grants.

  4. People need to remember that the Supreme Court is supposed to make decisions based on The Constitution and nothing more or less.

    1. Optimistic Outreach, I guess you think the SC was right in ruling for Citizens United and allowing dark money into politics, and also correct in gutting the Voting Rights Act, when they ruled pre-clearance was no longer necessary. The very next day practically, some states were again suppressing minority voters. There are issues now that did not exist when the Constitution was written. The SC has to keep up with the times, like any other institution. Common sense has to play a part in making decisions that affect an entire country, not just what the Founding Fathers decided on centuries ago.

    2. @Jason (sarcasm) maybe if u read the constitution backwards it says something about gays and adoptions.

  5. Freedom of choice.why would we need so many diffrent foster groups if they all did the same thing?

  6. I normally don’t like to get too caught up in these. There doesn’t seem to be any discussion of to what degree these organizations are on a range from private to public. If they were completely private, then the answer is obvious; let ’em be. It seems that the discussion only matters when there is some public aspect to an organization, but I’m not hearing anything that addresses that point on either a legal or ethical point of view. Sure, it’s implied, but it just isn’t well explained or quantified, and I think it’s very relevant if these organizations are to be governed at a public level.

  7. It’s called having church and state separate. Its qllways been this way set up by our founding fathers. If you start modifying one aspect then it will open the doors to govts disobeying sanctuary

  8. Meh, I’m not gay, but even if I was I don’t exactly wish my children would be adopted by the Catholic church. This decision will likely save some lives.

  9. But United States everybody have a freedom right to choose what they want to do within the rules of the law. If some company, church, or organisation don’t have the same value as you. You can go somewhere else that can Service you I share your same ideas.

  10. In the past, some people used “religious liberty” to discriminate against different races. Just sayin…

    1. In the present, these people say a man is a woman or a dog or a goat or a (my favorite) “magic dragon AND a large, ornate building”. That’s why they’re castrating 6 year olds.

    2. And in the present, people are discriminating against other races (white) with little excuse! Like what, slavery that no party lived through?

      The sins of the father are not inherited by the child.

    3. @Ontos its not even of the father, its “you’re responsible for the sins of someone that had a similar physical characteristic.”

  11. Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh. GENESIS 2:24 What GOD says and wants is more important then what man wants.

  12. If they didn’t hire or help black people would people see the problem then? It’s the same thing. It’s the civil rights movement all over again.

  13. If anyone “wants” to foster a child should be able to regardless of their sexual/religious preferences.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.