Should Breyer Step Down ASAP? | The Union-Busting Case With Possibly Huge Implications For Health And Safety Laws
March 15, 2021
COLLISION COURSE
|“As religious freedom emerges as a major theme at the Supreme Court this year, some court watchers are predicting a series of recent opinions involving COVID-19 restrictions have put that issue on a collision course with gay rights.” That’s John Fritze with USA Today reporting on the high court siding with churches in nine cases involving pandemic restrictions since November — a pattern that could suggest how the justices will rule later this year in a major case questioning whether Philadelphia can stop working with a Catholic charity that excludes same-sex couples from fostering parents. Fritze explains, “The foster agency case pits Philadelphia’s position that it can prohibit same-sex discrimination by its contractors against Catholic Social Services, which asserts it cannot screen same-sex couples to be foster parents because it opposes gay marriage on religious grounds…Part of the issue in the Philadelphia dispute is what test the court will use to determine whether a law violates the First Amendment right to free exercise of religion. The outcome could turn on whether the court finds that any secular exceptions to a law – say, allowing people into a hardware store during the pandemic – means there must also be exemptions for religious activity, such as attending Sunday morning services.”
IT'S NOW OR MAYBE NEVER
|Paul F. Campos argues in The New York Times that JUSTICE STEPHEN BREYER needs to avoid the mistake of his former colleague JUSTICE RUTH BADER GINSBURG and quit while the Democrats are ahead. But Campos worries the mistake is already being made. He writes, “The evident indifference on the part of Democrats regarding the failure of Justice Breyer, 82, to announce his retirement is apparently a product of the assumption that he will do so at some point during the current Congress and that therefore whether he does so anytime soon is not particularly important. This is a grave mistake. Consider that because of the extremely thin nature of their Democratic Senate control, the shift of a single seat from the Democrats to the Republicans or even one vacancy in the 50 seats now controlled by the Democratic caucus would probably result in the swift reinstallation of Mitch McConnell as the majority leader. What are the odds that something like this — a senator’s death, disabling health crisis or departure from office for other reasons — will happen sometime in this Congress’s remaining 22 months? Alarmingly for Democrats, if history is any guide, the odds are quite high.”
BOOM OR BUST
|Next Monday SCOTUS will hear arguments in a case challenging a nearly half-century-old regulation in California that allows union organizers to briefly enter agricultural worksites to speak with farmworkers. However, Ian Millhiser with Vox suggests the stakes of this case go far beyond union-busting. He explains that plaintiffs in Cedar Point Nursery v. Hassid are asking justices “to so radically reshape the court’s approach to property rights that some of the most basic state and federal health and safety laws could fall.”
THE 411 ON THE VRA
|“States nationwide are about to make it harder to vote. Acting partly in response to widespread false allegations of fraud in the 2020 presidential election, state legislatures have introduced about 250 bills this year that would limit access to voting.” That’s Isaac Cui in The Washington Post who also points out that many of these proposed voting restrictions could disproportionately affect voters of color. “The Voting Rights Act has been the primary law used to combat racial discrimination in voting. Recently, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Brnovich v. Democratic National Committee. Its decision could seriously restrict what remains of the VRA.” Cui provides us with a rundown of everything we need to know about our nation’s history of restricting voting, the VRA, and the question currently before justices.