Conservatives want courts to consider the governments' bigoted motives in enacting anti-Catholic Blaine amendments, but not when it comes to Trump's travel ban. Liberals tend to be inconsistent in the opposite way.
What’s at stake in Espinoza v. Montana Department of Revenue
Prof. Michael Helfand (Pepperdine), a leading expert on religious arbitration, passes this along.
Narendra Modi relies on private militants allied with his party to crack down on dissent.
Hate crime data suggest that claim is overblown.
No, says the trial court, and the Minnesota Court of Appeals agrees.
A response to a query of mine, from David Hodges of the Institute for Justice (who are plaintiff's lawyers).
An interesting analysis from Prof. Mark Movsesian (St. John's).
"It would be a violation of the First Amendment of the United States Constitution for the Court to order the Wife to participate in a religious ritual when she did not agree to do so nor may the Court impose a financial penalty against her."
The pioneering psychedelic researcher, Timothy Leary collaborator, and New Age seeker exemplified America's postwar turn to individualism.
A crime in Monsey leads to a redundant prosecution that hinges on the defendant's anti-Semitism.
His brutal response to the protests against his anti-Muslim initiative reveal him as a Hindu nationalist, not a reformer.
He is yanking their rights and building detention camps.
The human cost of border enforcement
Erroneous reporting set off a bizarre backlash that obscured the real problem.
The “Fairness for All Act” would add federal protections against discrimination for gay and trans people. But its exemptions go too far or not far enough, depending on who you ask.
Plus: the foundations bankrolling bad tech policy, they is the word of the year, and more...
What libertarians can learn from Catholic social doctrine
Instead of its economy becoming more liberal, its polity is growing more illiberal.
but the New York City Regional Emergency Medical Services Council denied the application, by a 12-7 vote.
Criminal charges were eventually dropped, and the civil lawsuit has just been thrown out.
That's the question in a First Amendment lawsuit, which a federal judge has allowed to go forward.
Vanity plates are private speech in a nonpublic forum, the court holds; restrictions on such speech must be viewpoint-neutral and reasonable.
Friday A/V Club: The 40th anniversary of Life of Brian's British debut—and of a legendary TV debate
But the technical nature of the decision might not stop future lawsuits.
Prof. Michael Broyde (Emory) responds to my post from a few weeks ago.
... as a condition of giving you a reasonable religious accommodation; quite right, I think, under Title VII religious accommodation principles.
An anthropologist examines secret societies, revolutionary movements, and esoteric ideas.
religious organizations' right to discriminate in some employment decisions, and federal funding conditions preferring local agencies that help federal immigration enforcement.
Snopes doesn’t seem to get the joke.
That's what flyers posted in Winchester (Massachusetts) say.
What’s at stake in Espinoza v. Montana Department of Revenue.
Justices rule that invitations are expressive speech and businesses cannot be compelled to write messages they oppose.
Harry Potter and the Baffling Return of Religious Panic
An economist and a science fiction author discuss cryogenics, mythology, philanthropy, fragmentation, and simulation.
Government officials fail to follow Supreme Court decisions at their own risk.
Activist Nury Turkel discusses the vast network of camps that may hold over a million Uighurs in western China.
The mysterious "hybrid rights" doctrine comes up again—but might not matter.
Do you care about free minds and free markets? Sign up to get the biggest stories from Reason in your inbox every afternoon.
This modal will close in 10
