This post originally appeared on TheHumanist.com. On Tuesday, June 26, the Supreme Court ruled against women, against evidence- and science-based healthcare, and against truth. In a highly contested 5-4 vote, the justices decided in favor of the National Institute of Family and Life Advocates (NIFLA). The court said that the California Reproductive Freedom, Accountability, Comprehensive Care, and Transparency Act (the “FACT” Act) violated the First Amendment, and that NIFLA’s free speech and free exercise rights were infringed upon with this act. The FACT Act required all state-licensed clinics to provide information about a range of family planning services, including the telephone numbers
This post originally appeared on TheHumanist.com. When the Supreme Court first released its decision in Masterpiece Cakeshop earlier this month, most commentators dismissed it as a nothing-burger. It looked like the court was simply punting on its responsibility to tell us what the law is. After all, the justices only get paid $214,000 per year—why should they bother doing their jobs for such a paltry sum? On closer inspection, though, it appears that the case sets a precedent that will haunt those of us who believe in equality under the law for a long time to come. As you probably know, Masterpiece is one of a number of cases around the country in which an individual (in this case, a baker)
This post originally appeared on TheHumanist.com. Panic is in the air. The announcement of Justice Anthony Kennedy’s retirement might have been welcomed by humanists if there was any likelihood that his replacement would be someone whose jurisprudence furthers human-centered public policy. But with Donald Trump in the White House and Republicans holding a majority in the Senate, that likelihood seems slim. Thus, we face a grim reality: a judicial landscape that, for humanists, is almost certain to change for the worse. As is widely known, without Kennedy the Supreme Court is divided evenly on many issues between the liberal and conservative camps. Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer
This post originally appeared on TheHumanist.com. Please welcome the new legal intern with the Appignani Humanist Legal Center, William Gogoel! TheHumanist.com: What is your educational and work background? During high school I worked various jobs over the summers, from temping in a paint lab to carpet removal and installation. For college I went to James Madison University, where I received my BA in philosophy. Because I was entertaining a legal career, I then got a job as a law clerk at a boutique firm in Alexandria, Virginia. I worked there for over a year, and in the process became deeply interested in legal practice. Consequently, I began attending George Washington University Law Schoo
For Immediate Release Contact: Roy Speckhardt, 202-238-9088, rspeckhardt@americanhumanist.org Isabelle Oldfield, 202-238-9088 ext. 112, ioldfield@americanhumanist.org (Washington, D.C., June 4, 2018)—The American Humanist Association expresses disappointment at today’s Supreme Court ruling in favor of Jack Phillips, the owner of Masterpiece Cakeshop, Ltd. The case, Masterpiece Cakeshop, Ltd., et al. v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission et al., arises from Phillips’s refusal, on religious grounds, to make a wedding cake for a same-sex couple. It was argued before the U.S. Supreme Court in December 2017. While the Court majority decided in favor of the shop owner, Justices Ginsburg and Sotoma
