Name: Gorsuch, Thomas Decry Policy As Religious Ad Case Rejected (2)
Brand: bloomberglaw.com
SKU: bloomberglaw-com-8
Availability: OnlineOnly

critic

Gorsuch, Thomas Decry Policy As Religious Ad Case Rejected (2)

preview

Free Newsletter Sign Up Login Log in to access all of your BLAW products Single Sign-On Free Newsletter Sign Up U.S. Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch in Washington, D.C., Sept. 28, 2017 Andrew Harrer/Bloomberg via Getty Images The Supreme Court once again refused to consider whether a ban on religious advertising on Washington Metro buses is constitutional, with justices Neil Gorsuch and Clarence Thomas noting their dismay with the transit agency’s policy.In turning away the First Amendment challenge from the Catholic Archdiocese in the nation’s capital on Monday, the justices upheld a lower court ruling that the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority’s rejection of overtly-religious Christmas season ads. The proposed bus-side placards featured the silhouettes of three shepherds plus sheep, accompanied by the words, “Find the Perfect Gift,” and a church web address. Justice Brett Kavanaugh didn’t take part in considering the high court petition. He was still on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit when it reviewed the dispute. His absence potentially deprived the court’s conservative wing of a crucial fifth vote in favor of overturning the D.C. Circuit’s ruling. So given that “the full Court is unable to hear this case,” Gorsuch wrote in a , “it makes a poor candidate for our review.” But Gorsuch, joined by Thomas, went on to say that, “but for that complication, however, our intervention and a reversal would be warranted.”The case involves “viewpoint discrimination by a governmental entity and a violation of the First Amendment,” Gorsuch wrote. That amendment, the justice added, “requires governments to protect religious viewpoints, not single them out for silencing.”Showing the high stakes of the dispute, each side was represented by former U.S. solicitors general: Kirkland’s for the Archdiocese of Washington; and Munger, Tolles &amp; Olson’s for WMATA. The agency said it’s “pleased that the Supreme Court decided not to review the well-reasoned decision of the D.C. Circuit upholding WMATA’s advertising guidelines. The D.C. Circuit said that WMATA’s guidelines did not violate the U.S. Constitution, and found that the Archdiocese’s claims were contrary to Supreme Court precedent and would undermine the First Amendment values that precedent protects.”Though the Archdiocese’s appeal was rejected, the justices’ statement gave hope to religious advocates seeking to get the issue in front of the high court someday.“While we are disappointed that the Supreme Court denied review of the lower court’s troubling decision, we are heartened by Justice Gorsuch’s statement, joined by Justice Thomas,” said , director of the Center for Law and Religious Freedom at the Christian Legal Society. She filed an urging the justices to take the case.“Their statement recognizes that the Court has a longstanding commitment to ending viewpoint discrimination against religious speakers and their messages,” Colby said. “The statement encouragingly signals that the issue likely will be reviewed in a future case.”The Supreme Court “denies certiorari in about 99% of all cases,” observed , who likewise the high court to review the D.C. Circuit’s decision, on behalf of the Foundation for Moral Law. “A denial of certiorari means the lower court decision stands, at least for the present, but it does not mean the Court agrees with the lower court’s decision,” Eidsmoe pointed out. He noted that the high court’s 2017 Trinity Lutheran decision that agencies can’t single out religious institutions for discrimination by making them ineligible for programs that are available to others generally. “We are optimistic that this issue will soon come before the Court,” Eidsmoe said, “and when it does, the Court will reaffirm its prior holding: Discrimination against religion must stop.”The high court similarly in June a request to review a challenge to the the agency’s refusal to run a derogatory ad featuring the Prophet Muhammad.Since then, however, the Philadelphia-based U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit has come to the opposite conclusion, finding that Lackawanna County, Pa., couldn’t reject an advertisement from an atheist group. The circuit split makes it more likely that the court will eventually agree to hear the issue, perhaps in a different case.The case is , U.S., No. 18-1455, review denied 4/6/20. (Adds comments from Colby, Eidsmoe, WMATA. Previous update added detail from statement. ) To contact the reporters on this story: Kimberly Strawbridge Robinson in Washington at ; Jordan S. Rubin in Washington at To contact the editors responsible for this story: Jessie Kokrda Kamens at ; Andrew Harris at To read more articles . Learn more about a . Kimberly Strawbridge Robinson Reporter Jordan S. Rubin Reporter © 2022 The Bureau of National Affairs, Inc. All Rights Reserved

Free Newsletter Sign Up Login Log in to access all of your BLAW products Single Sign-On Free Newsletter Sign Up U.S. Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch in Washington, D.C., Sept. 28, 2017 Andrew Harrer/Bloomberg via Getty Images The Supreme Court once again refused to consider whether a ban on religious advertising on Washington Metro buses is constitutional, with justices Neil Gorsuch and Clarence Thomas noting their dismay with the transit agency’s policy.In turning away the First Amendment challenge from the Catholic Archdiocese in the nation’s capital on Monday, the justices upheld a...

Gorsuch, Thomas Decry Policy As Religious Ad Case Rejected (2)

No article scores yet.

CRITIC REVIEWS

PUBLIC REVIEWS