Reason.com - Free Minds and Free Markets
Reason logo Reason logo
  • Latest
  • Magazine
    • Current Issue
    • Archives
    • Subscribe
    • Crossword
  • Video
  • Podcasts
    • All Shows
    • The Reason Roundtable
    • The Reason Interview With Nick Gillespie
    • The Soho Forum Debates
    • Just Asking Questions
    • The Best of Reason Magazine
    • Why We Can't Have Nice Things
  • Volokh
  • Newsletters
  • Donate
    • Donate Online
    • Donate Crypto
    • Ways To Give To Reason Foundation
    • Torchbearer Society
    • Planned Giving
  • Subscribe
    • Reason Plus Subscription
    • Print Subscription
    • Gift Subscriptions
    • Subscriber Support

Login Form

Create new account
Forgot password

Travel Bans, Gay Wedding Cakes, Gun Rights, and Border Shootings: Special All Supreme Court P.M. Links

Scott Shackford | 6.26.2017 4:30 PM

Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL
Media Contact & Reprint Requests
  • Supreme Court
    Gary Blakeley

    Today was the Supreme Court's final day of releasing orders and decisions for the term, and it was a bit of a doozy. Top news: The court allowed most of President Donald Trump's travel ban to take effect except in cases of those who have "bona fide" relationships with the United States. This is not a "ruling," though. It's a temporary lifting of the injunction until they hear the case in October.

  • The Supreme Court also ruled that Missouri cannot refuse to grant public funds to a church simply because it is a religious institution, as this is a violation of the free exercise clause of the Constitution. The case was about whether a church could have access to a grant to help pay the costs of resurfacing a playground.
  • The Supreme Court also decided it will hear whether a baker can, due to his religious beliefs, refuse to bake and sell a wedding cake to same-sex couples.
  • The Supreme Court also decided it would refuse to hear a case from California to rule on whether the Second Amendment protected the right to carry firearms in public.
  • Rather than deciding whether the family of a Mexican teenager killed by a federal agent can sue over a fatal shooting that took place across the U.S.-Mexico border, the Supreme Court kicked it back down to a lower court.
  • The Supreme Court also struck down a law in Arkansas that caused officials to refuse to list both members of same-sex couples as parents on birth certificates. Note that the law does allow for non-biological fathers to be listed as parents in heterosexual cases, so this wasn't a matter of actual genetic parentage.

Follow us on Facebook and Twitter, and don't forget to sign up for Reason's daily updates for more content.

Start your day with Reason. Get a daily brief of the most important stories and trends every weekday morning when you subscribe to Reason Roundup.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

NEXT: Jake Tapper: 'We Are Not the Resistance, We Are Not the Opposition'

Scott Shackford is a policy research editor at Reason Foundation.

Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL
Media Contact & Reprint Requests

Hide Comments (88)

Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.

  1. Fist of Etiquette   8 years ago

    Top news: The court allowed most of President Donald Trump's travel ban to take effect except in cases of those who have "bona fide" relationships with the United States.

    VICTORY AND VINDICATION.

    1. Rufus The Monocled   8 years ago

      Hello.

      Ha. Trump wins again.

      1. Fist of Etiquette   8 years ago

        It's what winners do.

    2. mad.casual   8 years ago

      VICTORY AND VINDICATION.

      Actually, thus far, I do feel vindicated. In that it seems unlikely it'll be unanimously overruled and that, for a malevolent Washington outsider with zero knowledge of how to run our government, it's like he's not even really trying to be unconstitutional. I mean, he's got a pen and a phone, what more does he need?

      1. BestUsedCarSales   8 years ago

        Why call them the executive if we don't want them to execute?

      2. Homple   8 years ago

        Besides a pen and a phone and a phone, he has the straightforward English text of part (f) of 8 U.S. Code ? 1182 - Inadmissible aliens:

        (f) Suspension of entry or imposition of restrictions by President

        Whenever the President finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or nonimmigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate.

        https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1182

        1. Zeb   8 years ago

          That does make it pretty clear. The question remains as to whether applications of that law could be unconstitutional if the classes of people are religiously defined. But I don't even think that's really relevant to this. It's not really a Muslim ban as most of the world's Muslims are still as free to travel here as they were before.

          1. Bgoptmst   8 years ago

            I get his words on the campaign trail are damning, but the top five Muslims countries in the world aren't on the ban, so this hits me as a massive straw man.

            Also, it seems to me that all those countries probably require some extra vetting since they are third world holes whose citizens probably have good cause to dislike the rate at which we shwack their friends and relatives (aiming for satire not /sarc)

  2. Fist of Etiquette   8 years ago

    This is not a "ruling," though.

    That ain't bona fide.

  3. Fist of Etiquette   8 years ago

    The Supreme Court also decided it will hear whether a baker can, due to his religious beliefs, refuse to bake and sell a wedding cake to same-sex couples.

    Well, he can. It's whether he may.

  4. Fist of Etiquette   8 years ago

    The Supreme Court also decided it would refuse to hear a case from California to rule on whether the Second Amendment protected the right to carry firearms in public.

    They're busy lawyers. They don't have all day to sit around and listen people arguing.

  5. Fist of Etiquette   8 years ago

    The case was about whether a church could have access to a grant to help pay the costs of resurfacing a playground.

    You know who else resurfaced?

    1. Jerry on the sea   8 years ago

      Not Richard Simmons.

    2. Citizen X - #6   8 years ago

      Jacques Cousteau?

    3. OBJ FRANKELSON   8 years ago

      Whitey Bulger?

    4. Dillinger   8 years ago

      Courteney Cox?

    5. Citizen X - #6   8 years ago

      Mary Lee?

    6. Scarecrow Repair & Chippering   8 years ago

      Whoever buried Jimmy Hoffa?

    7. Chipper Morning, Now #1   8 years ago

      Jesse and Gojira?

    8. Half-Virtue, Half-Vice   8 years ago

      The Shredder?

    9. This Machine Chips Fascists   8 years ago

      Captain Nemo?

      1. Chipper Morning, Now #1   8 years ago

        Aw cute, when did the little fish become a captain?

    10. Gaear Grimsrud   8 years ago

      Elvis Presley?

  6. Fist of Etiquette   8 years ago

    Rather than deciding whether the family of a Mexican teenager killed by a federal agent can sue over a fatal shooting that took place across the U.S.-Mexico border, the Supreme Court kicked it back down to a lower court.

    Who then built a wall around it and ignored the whole thing.

    1. DJF   8 years ago

      If we had a wall it would protect Mexicans from evil American bullets.

    2. Chipper Morning, Now #1   8 years ago

      Let's put air conditioners on the wall and pump all the hot air into Mexico.

      1. This Machine Chips Fascists   8 years ago

        Smell our BTUs!

    3. BYODB   8 years ago

      This isn't even a question. We can't even sue our local police for a wrongful shooting, and we're citizens.

    4. Gaear Grimsrud   8 years ago

      "The Border Patrol changed its use-of-force policies in the wake of Hernandez's death and other controversial cross-border shootings of alleged rock throwers. Agents are now urged, if at all possible, to move out of range of thrown projectiles."
      Can they still shoot their dogs?

      1. Bgoptmst   8 years ago

        Doesn't even seem worth it to patrol the border. Border Patrol would probably even get in trouble for no-knock flash bang grenade baby-burn incident.

  7. Fist of Etiquette   8 years ago

    Note that the law does allow for non-biological fathers to be listed as parents in heterosexual cases, so this wasn't a matter of actual genetic parentage.

    You're not the damn paterfamilias.

    1. Citizen X - #6   8 years ago

      I think we all know what movie Eugene saw last night.

      1. Fist of Etiquette   8 years ago

        If the phrase bona fide doesn't make you think of that, then I don't even know who you are anymore.

        1. Stormy Dragon   8 years ago

          So you're saying Citizen X should stay out of the Woolworth's?

          1. Conchfritters   8 years ago

            Not sure if it was just the one location, or the entire chain.

      2. Chipper Morning, Now #1   8 years ago

        Impolex?

    2. BestUsedCarSales   8 years ago

      First 7 posts Fist. Calm down man. You've shown your dominance already.

      1. Fist of Etiquette   8 years ago

        Not until I smell submissive urination from the each of the rest of the commentariat.

  8. Citizen X - #6   8 years ago

    Special All Supreme Court P.M. Links

    Like there's nothing else going on in the world, REASON.

    1. Jerry on the sea   8 years ago

      Thai man has metal rings cut off his penis by the fire brigade after his 'sexual experiment' went wrong.

      1. Chipper Morning, Now #1   8 years ago

        I want Christopher Walken to narrate that news story.

        1. yet another dave   8 years ago

          ...or a Japanese school girl.... horrified giggling should help

  9. Juice   8 years ago

    The Supreme Court also decided it would refuse to hear a case from California to rule on whether the Second Amendment protected the right to carry firearms in public.

    Don't you think this is a good thing though? If they had heard it, chances are they would have upheld the decision. Now, it can come up in a future court, which may overturn it.

    1. Deep Lurker   8 years ago

      I think the anti-gun wing of the court is punting. Their reasoning is that if they rule that an ordinary person has a right to carry guns in public, then they'll be committing an act of Treason Against Civilization Itself. But if they do the proper thing and rule the other way, doing their best to strike down then 2nd Amendment as unconstitutional, then the Bitter Clingers will riot and transform America into a lawless barbaric nation. So they punt, doing their best to put off the evil day for as long as possible.

  10. Citizen X - #6   8 years ago

    Florida Man Engages In Florida Activities

    1. BYODB   8 years ago

      What the fuck, Florida, what the fuck? They are truly America's dick.

      1. Conchfritters   8 years ago

        Florida Golf Cart Chop Shop

    2. Dillinger   8 years ago

      Six-Toe County...

    3. John C. Randolph   8 years ago

      Clearwater, eh? Another scientologist went non-linear?

      -jcr

  11. OBJ FRANKELSON   8 years ago

    So nothing on the Sargon v. Sarkeesian VidCon drama? Geeze, what kind of world are we living in. Reason should be all over GamerGate drama, its totes libertarian.

    1. Half-Virtue, Half-Vice   8 years ago

      Glad you mentioned this so I could go check it out. Sargon is a gentleman fighting against petty authoritarianism for all of us, he should have Reason's support. The man's who arguments are balanced upon morality and rationalism.

      1. BestUsedCarSales   8 years ago

        Every time I end up reading about these video game controversies I conclude that we all should die. Everyone on all sides. There's nothing of value here, we should all just pass from this Earth. It's sad that I haven't finished Persona 5 yet, but oh well, we should still all die.

        1. Half-Virtue, Half-Vice   8 years ago

          *signs up for suicide pact*

          Though this current Sargon v. Sarkeesian thing (as OBJ puts it), is not about video games.

          1. BestUsedCarSales   8 years ago

            The mass death is still completely warranted.

        2. Unlabelable MJGreen   8 years ago

          Why do we have to die? They're the ones who suck.

      2. Unlabelable MJGreen   8 years ago

        Are you fucking serious??

        (that's the extent of my Sargon impression)

        1. Half-Virtue, Half-Vice   8 years ago

          Eh... idk, every Sargon vid I've seen seems to come from the same place of valued ideals as Reason's content.

          I personally feel that I'm drawn to Sargon for the exact same reasons I am drawn to Reason.com -- I enjoy a discussion of ideas that do not hide from nor are they derived from dogmatic, tribalistic platitudes. A discussion of ideas that truly attempt to adhere to objectivity rather than just a lip service of objective reasoning (though I feel a certain level of subjectivity remains in all human interaction).

          1. BestUsedCarSales   8 years ago

            Subjectivity is core. The big question is are you arguing axiomatically. That is, do you have some axiomatic base that you try to derive your beliefs from.

            I believe many do not, unless we consider party loyalty to be an axiom.

            1. Unlabelable MJGreen   8 years ago

              The axioms are subjective, so I don't get the point here.

          2. Zeb   8 years ago

            As I often say, we are all a lot less rational than we like to think. People are really good at convincing themselves that what they want to believe is obviously the thing that all smart, logical people should believe.

            Even with a supposedly axiomatic belief system, I think there are generally a lot of tacit assumptions and logical leaps.

            I still think that what I believe is the right thing, or at least pretty good to go on.

          3. Unlabelable MJGreen   8 years ago

            He seems like an OK liberal guy, but I find his commentary is generally 20 minute videos asking incredulously, "Are you fucking serious?"

      3. John C. Randolph   8 years ago

        Sargon is a gentleman fighting against petty authoritarianism

        No, he's not. He's an asshole looking for attention wherever he can find it. The fact that he's butting heads with another asshole doesn't make him a gentleman.

        You probably don't remember, but soggy used to essentially make a Tony of himself in various Libertarian forums around the net.

        -jcr

  12. Rich   8 years ago

    whether the Second Amendment protected the right to carry firearms in public.

    "You have the right to practice your religion, but not in public."

    1. BearOdinson   8 years ago

      You have the right to print what you want, as long as no one actually sees it.

      1. BestUsedCarSales   8 years ago

        You have the right to delegate powers to the state as long as they are not explicitly delegated in the Constitution, as long as no one is aware of it.

        1. Ayuleen   8 years ago

          You have the right to vote for whoever you want, as long as it doesn?t change shit.

  13. 0x90   8 years ago

    SCOTUSblog? Verified account

    SCOTUS lifts injunction against travel ban, except with respect to individuals with bona dude relationship to the US

    1. BearOdinson   8 years ago

      The Chinaman is not the issue!

      1. Chipper Morning, Now #1   8 years ago

        All right, can we all get together and get Bear some new movies?

        1. Unlabelable MJGreen   8 years ago

          You betcha.

        2. BearOdinson   8 years ago

          Sorry! I finally got my oldest son to watch it, and we have been steadily quoting it for days!

    2. MarkLastname   8 years ago

      You know who else wanted to bone a dude?

      (The answer is actually Ernst Roehm.. but you know she wanted to bone?)

  14. BearOdinson   8 years ago

    Regarding the Arkansas birth certificate decision, the law isn't quite what is made out here. The state law specifies that the birth mother will be the "mother" on the certificate and that if she is married at the time of conception or birth, then her husband is listed as the "father". The exception for non-husband father only applies if the mother, the husband and the "putative father" all sign affidavits swearing to the paternity of the putative father.

    IOW the birth certificate is merely ascribing parentage to the mother (obvious) and the presumed father. That is it.
    Now, perhaps the people of the State of Arkansas should push their legislature to change the law for the birth certificate requirements. But this is NOT directly related to the "constellations" of marriage as upheld by Obergfell.

    1. BearOdinson   8 years ago

      Sorry, also regarding artificial insemination, when it is anonymous, then the woman's husband is the presumed father for purposes of the birth certificate.

      BTW: Read Gorsuch's dissent. It is short, and quite to the point.

  15. B.P.   8 years ago

    Unusual alliance: Pot smokers and Koch network

    http://www.denverpost.com/2017.....-on-drugs/

    Reporter is mystified that Koch Brothers stand for something they've always stood for. Presumably because all the reporter ever reads is fundraising hit pieces instead of the actual words of the actual target.

    1. Juice   8 years ago

      I fought the drugs and the drugs won.

    2. Scarecrow Repair & Chippering   8 years ago

      Fundraising hit pieces are the Left's training manuals. What else would you have him read?

    3. BestUsedCarSales   8 years ago

      It would be interesting to ask people who rally hard against the Koch brothers if they could name a single piece of policy the Kochs support.

  16. Crusty Juggler is bae.   8 years ago

    The 2nd Amendment and self-defense in California?

    Security footage shows the moment two robbers broke into a Brentwood, California home and were shot dead by the owner.

    The video, which was released by neighbor Reggie Nichols, shows the two men entering the home on the 200 block of Birch Street a little after 11pm on June 21.

    Shortly after entering, flashes of light are seen inside the garage as the homeowner shoots at the two.

    Police say they do not plan to charge him as he acted in self defense.

    1. mad.casual   8 years ago

      I count 4 shots at two perps. I put the likelihood he's an officer of the law somewhere below 20%.

      1. Crusty Juggler is bae.   8 years ago

        Good point - he did exhibit better accuracy than the LASD recently did, that's for sure.

  17. Crusty Juggler is bae.   8 years ago

    The "right" is just is bananas as the "left":

    During the 30th anniversary, speakeasy-themed gala, the William F. Buckley Jr. Award for Media Excellence will be presented to Sean Hannity.

    LOL.

    1. BearOdinson   8 years ago

      Whether or not someone agrees with Limbaugh's positions, at least it can be said that he was (is) entertaining and really did pioneer what talk radio has become.

      Hannity is just fucking BORING. The same shtick every day.

      1. BestUsedCarSales   8 years ago

        I rarely see someone suck the establishment's dick with such enthusiasm.

        It's like he doesn't have opinions other than party lines.

  18. Mock-star   8 years ago

    Dog elected mayor

    http://pittsburgh.cbslocal.com.....dog-mayor/

    1. mad.casual   8 years ago

      Dog elected mayor

      Faux libertarians laugh. Real libertarians recognize that any time a dog is forced to participate in a mayoral election, it's rape.

      1. This Machine Chips Fascists   8 years ago

        ^^^woke^^^

  19. Bubba Jones   8 years ago

    I am confused.

    Temporary 120 day ban was blocked for 200(?) days and now reinstated for about a year as they hear arguments in October and issue a ruling next year.

    Does D.C. use a different definition of temporary than everyone else? Definitely a different calendar. This travel ban should be moot by now.

  20. Tamfang   8 years ago

    "The Supreme Court also decided it would refuse to hear a case"

    So it hasn't refused yet, merely decided to refuse at some future date?

Please log in to post comments

Mute this user?

  • Mute User
  • Cancel

Ban this user?

  • Ban User
  • Cancel

Un-ban this user?

  • Un-ban User
  • Cancel

Nuke this user?

  • Nuke User
  • Cancel

Un-nuke this user?

  • Un-nuke User
  • Cancel

Flag this comment?

  • Flag Comment
  • Cancel

Un-flag this comment?

  • Un-flag Comment
  • Cancel

Latest

Brickbat: Cursing Ain't Allowed in School

Charles Oliver | 5.19.2025 4:00 AM

Are the News Media in Their Onion Era?

Joe Lancaster | From the June 2025 issue

Alton Brown on Cultural Appropriation, Ozempic, and the USDA

Nick Gillespie | From the June 2025 issue

James Comey's Deleted '86 47' Instagram Post Is Obviously Protected by the First Amendment

Billy Binion | 5.16.2025 4:48 PM

New Montana Law Blocks the State From Buying Private Data To Skirt the Fourth Amendment

Joe Lancaster | 5.16.2025 4:05 PM

Recommended

  • About
  • Browse Topics
  • Events
  • Staff
  • Jobs
  • Donate
  • Advertise
  • Subscribe
  • Contact
  • Media
  • Shop
  • Amazon
Reason Facebook@reason on XReason InstagramReason TikTokReason YoutubeApple PodcastsReason on FlipboardReason RSS

© 2024 Reason Foundation | Accessibility | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

r

Do you care about free minds and free markets? Sign up to get the biggest stories from Reason in your inbox every afternoon.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

This modal will close in 10

Reason Plus

Special Offer!

  • Full digital edition access
  • No ads
  • Commenting privileges

Just $25 per year

Join Today!