Log in

goodpods headphones icon

To access all our features

Open the Goodpods app
Close icon
FedSoc Forums - Courthouse Steps Decision: Little Sisters of the Poor v. Pennsylvania

Courthouse Steps Decision: Little Sisters of the Poor v. Pennsylvania

07/10/20 • 49 min

FedSoc Forums
In Little Sisters of the Poor v. Pennsylvania, the justices upheld in a 7-2 ruling a federal rule exempting employers with religious or moral objections from providing contraceptive coverage to their employees under the Affordable Care Act. Eric Kniffin joins us to discuss the decision and its implications.
Featuring:
-- Eric N. Kniffin, Partner, Lewis Roca Rothgerber Christie LLP
plus icon
bookmark
In Little Sisters of the Poor v. Pennsylvania, the justices upheld in a 7-2 ruling a federal rule exempting employers with religious or moral objections from providing contraceptive coverage to their employees under the Affordable Care Act. Eric Kniffin joins us to discuss the decision and its implications.
Featuring:
-- Eric N. Kniffin, Partner, Lewis Roca Rothgerber Christie LLP

Previous Episode

undefined - Courthouse Steps Decision: The Limits of Robocalls, Barr v. American Association of Political Consultants, Inc.

Courthouse Steps Decision: The Limits of Robocalls, Barr v. American Association of Political Consultants, Inc.

In Barr v. American Association of Political Consultants, Inc., the Supreme Court held unconstitutional a portion of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act that protected the public from certain kinds of robocalls to cell phones. In a badly split (3-1-3-2) decision, the Court concluded that the statute unconstitutionally imposed a content-based limitation on speech by generally banning robocalls but creating an exception for calls to collect a debt "owed to or guaranteed by the United States." Thus, the American Association of Political Consultants (AAPC), which wished to make political robocalls, was prohibited from doing so by the statute. The Court held that it was unconstitutional to treat calls differently depending on their content, and it remedied the violation by eliminating the exception for calls to collect a government debt. In the end, the AAPC convinced the Court that the statute was unconstitutional, but was not able to convince the Court that its own speech should be protected. Instead, we now have a ban on robocalls that applies regardless of content to both debt collection and political speech.
Featuring:
Prof. Michael R. Dimino, Professor of Law, Widener University School of Law
This call is open to the public; please dial 888-752-3232 at 12:00 noon to access the call.

Next Episode

undefined - Courthouse Steps Decision: Our Lady of Guadalupe School v. Morrissey-Berru

Courthouse Steps Decision: Our Lady of Guadalupe School v. Morrissey-Berru

In today's decision in Our Lady of Guadalupe School v. Morrissey-Berru (together with St. James School v. Biel), the justices decided, by a vote of 7-2, that the judgments of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit are reversed and the cases remanded. Justice Alito's majority opinion was joined by the Chief Justice and Justices Thomas, Breyer, Kagan, Gorsuch, and Kavanaugh. Justice Thomas also filed a concurring opinion, joined by Justice Gorsuch. Justice Sotomayor dissented, joined by Justice Ginsburg. Daniel Blomberg joins us to discuss this decision and its implications.
Featuring:
Daniel Blomberg, Senior Counsel, Becket Fund for Religious Liberty
This call is open to the public - please dial 888-752-3232 to access the call.

Episode Comments

Generate a badge

Get a badge for your website that links back to this episode

Select type & size
Open dropdown icon
share badge image

<a href="https://goodpods.com/podcasts/fedsoc-forums-465/courthouse-steps-decision-little-sisters-of-the-poor-v-pennsylvania-9489956"> <img src="https://storage.googleapis.com/goodpods-images-bucket/badges/generic-badge-1.svg" alt="listen to courthouse steps decision: little sisters of the poor v. pennsylvania on goodpods" style="width: 225px" /> </a>

Copy