We voted.
Then we waited. And fretted over the outcome. And waited some more.
While we did, perhaps some of us missed Wednesday’s arguments in the latest U.S. Supreme Court case pitting religious freedom vs. gay rights and the Sexual Revolution.
The dispute involves the city of Philadelphia ending its foster care contract with Catholic Social Services over the faith-based agency’s refusal to place children with same-sex parents.
Here are five key numbers that stood out to me:
5,000 CHILDREN IN CUSTODY
NPR’s Nina Totenberg’s reported:
On one side is the city of Philadelphia, which has custody of about 5,000 abused and neglected children, and contracts with 30 private agencies to provide foster care in group homes and for the certification, placement, and care of children in individual private foster care homes.
Reuters’ Lawrence Hurley and Andrew Chung asked a city official about the potential impact if the Supreme Court rules in favor of Catholic Society Services:
A ruling against Philadelphia could make it easier for people to cite religious beliefs when seeking exemptions from widely applicable laws such as anti-discrimination statutes.
“If individual organizations can begin to choose to discriminate against whom they want to serve, then it does begin to set an unfortunate precedent,” said Cynthia Figueroa, Philadelphia’s deputy mayor for children and families.
ZERO SAME-SEX PARENTS DENIED
Robert Barnes of The Washington Post quoted Lori Windham:
“Zero” was the answer from Windham, a lawyer for the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, when asked how many same-sex couples had been denied the opportunity to be foster parents because of CSS policy. She said if ever approached, the agency would refer the couple to one of the more than two dozen agencies that have no issue with same-sex marriage.
“The city has no compelling reason for excluding Catholic Social Services, which has exercised its faith by serving at-risk children in Philadelphia for two centuries,” Windham said. “Nor does it have any interest in refusing to allow the agency to step aside and provide referrals elsewhere. Yet, Philadelphia is refusing to place children with loving mothers … just because they chose to partner with an agency who shares their faith.”
FIRST MAJOR CASE FOR BARRETT
Agence France-Presse explained:
It is first major hearing to come before Justice Amy Coney Barrett, a devout Catholic appointed by President Donald Trump and sworn in last week over the objection of Democrats.
For more details on Barrett’s faith, see this primer.
SIX CONSERVATIVE JUSTICES
The court’s new 6-3 majority makes a ruling in favor of Catholic Social Services likely, several news organizations reported.
The Associated Press’ Jessica Gresko noted:
Catholic Social Services, which is affiliated with the Archdiocese of Philadelphia, says its religious views keep it from certifying same-sex couples as foster parents. And it says it shouldn’t be shut out of a contract with the city to find foster homes for children. Philadelphia says it requires all the foster care agencies it works with not to discriminate as part of their contract.
With the addition of three appointees of President Donald Trump, Justices Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett, the court would seem poised to extend protections for religious objections to anti-discrimination laws.
THIRTY-YEAR-OLD PRECEDENT AT ISSUE
In a preview of Wednesday’s court session, Michelle Boorstein of The Washington Post explained:
In Fulton, the court will consider whether the city violated the First Amendment by disallowing Catholic Social Services from being part of its foster care system.
The justices are also being asked to overturn a ruling that has been controversial for religious conservatives since it was made 30 years ago: Employment Division v. Smith. The decision, which says a person’s religious motivations don’t exempt them from neutral, generally applicable laws, was written by Justice Antonin Scalia and said that without limits “every citizen [would] become a law unto himself.”
However, the justices may decide this case without touching on the previous one, Religion News Service’s Yonat Shimron noted:
Short of overruling Smith, the court could opt for a narrow ruling that affects only Catholic Social Services. For example, in 2018, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of a Christian baker in Colorado who refused to design a cake for a couple’s same-sex wedding. In that case — Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission — the court said the Colorado commission’s nondiscrimination policy was hostile to religion. It did not rule more broadly that the Constitution gives private businesses the right to religious exemptions from general laws.
Look for a ruling in June.
CONTINUE READING “Faith And Foster Care: 5 Key Numbers As SCOTUS Case Pits Religion Vs. Gay Rights,” by Bobby Ross, Jr., at Religion Unplugged.