Subscribe to RSS - Ongoing

United States v. Sterling

Marine Lance Corporal Monifa Sterling defied her superior officers on multiple occasions. She refused to report to duty when ordered and refused to wear the required uniform. She also posted signs in her public workspace, where other Marines routinely came to receive support services, which stated: "No weapon formed against me shall prosper." When her supervisor ordered her to remove the signs, LCpl Sterling refused--twice--causing her superior officer to take the signs down herself. 

Stapleton v. Advocate Healthcare Network and Subsidiaries

The Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) regulates employee-benefit plans to protect the interests of employees who participate in these plans. To avoid undue governmental intrusion in church affairs, the Act provides an exemption for plans established by churches. Some non-church entities have begun to claim this exemption.

Rollins v. Dignity Health

The Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) regulates employee-benefit plans to protect the interests of employees who participate in these plans. To avoid undue governmental intrusion in church affairs, the Act provides an exemption for plans established by churches. Some non-church entities have begun to claim this exemption.

Kaplan v. St. Peter's Healthcare System

The Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) regulates employee-benefit plans to protect the interests of employees who participate in the plans. To avoid undue governmental intrusion in church affairs, the Act provides an exemption for plans established by churches. Some non-church entities have begun to claim this exemption.

Williamson v. Brevard County

For many years, the Brevard County Board of County Commissioners has opened its meetings with an invocation. Between January 2010 and May 2015, 168 invocations were delivered by volunteers invited by the Board, and nearly all the invocations were overtly Christian.

Lund v. Rowan County

The Rowan County Board of Commissioners opens its public meetings with an invocation given by one of the Commissioners. Ninety-seven percent of these invocations are explicitly Christian, and Commissioners direct the audience to participate in the prayers. The Commissioners have made statements suggesting that the County views non-Christian beliefs with disfavor, and they have created an atmosphere that led to the harassment of religious minorities at Board meetings.

Bormuth v. County of Jackson

The Jackson County Board of Commissioners opens its public meetings with an invocation delivered by one of its nine Commissioners. The Commissioners—all of whom are Christian—deliver Christian prayers, often in the name of Jesus Christ, and do not allow members of other faiths to lead the prayer. Citizens who attend the meetings in order to petition the Commissioners have little choice but to participate, even if doing so violates their conscience.

Miller v. Davis

In June 2015, after the Supreme Court’s decision in Obergefell v. Hodges, which held that same-sex couples have a constitutionally protected right to marry, Rowan County Clerk Kim Davis refused to allow her office to issue marriage licenses to any couple, be they same-sex or different-sex. Davis stated that her religious beliefs forbade her from giving marriage licenses to same-sex couples, so she would not give out any marriage licenses at all.

Lexington-Fayette Urban County Human Rights Commission v. Hands on Originals

In March 2012, the Gay & Lesbian Services Organization of Lexington, Kentucky sought to purchase t-shirts from Hands on Originals, a local, for-profit, screen-printing shop. GLSO wanted to have the words “Lexington Pride Festival” and a multi-colored numeral “5” printed on the shirts (the shirts were for the locality’s fifth annual Pride Festival). HOO’s owner, upon learning what the Pride Festival represented, refused to serve the GLSO.

Dawson v. City of Grand Haven

In the 1960s, the City of Grand Haven erected a display pole on a large, publicly-owned sand dune overlooking the City’s waterfront. The pole could be raised or lowered as needed, and it could be fitted with either an anchor or a cross feature. The City equipped the pole with the cross feature both on its own initiative—for example, to celebrate the Christmas season—and at the request of City residents, who could pay a fee to use the cross as a backdrop for events on the waterfront. No other monuments were allowed on the sand dune. 

Pages