Fulton versus city of philadelphia. The honorable chief justice and associate justices of the Supreme Court of the United States. Oye, oye, oye. All persons having business honorable, the Supreme Court of the United States are admonished to get their attention for the court is now sitting. God save the United States and this honorable court. Roberts we will hear argument this morning in case number 19120 three, fulton versus city of philadelphia. Ms. Windham . Mr. Chief justice and may it please the court. The courts below made a civil error. They fail to understand where smith controls and where does not. Smith does not control where a government uses individual exemptions or makes other exceptions that undermine rules or when it changes rules to prohibit a religious practice. Philadelphia made all three errors here. The city cannot identify a neutral, generally applicable law after six attempt. Attempts. It now acknowledges its decisions are subjective and individualized. Yet the cou
Couples. The Supreme Court has until june of next year, to issue a ruling in the case. Fulton versus city of philadelphia. The honorable, chief justice and associate justices of the Supreme Court of the United States. Oye, oye. All persons having business before the honorable, Supreme Court of the United States are admonished to get their attention for the court is now sitting. God save the United States and its honorable court. We will hear argument this morning in case number 19120 three, fulton versus city of philadelphia. Ms. Windham . Mr. Chief justice and may it please the court, the courts below made a civil error. They failed to understand where a simple error. Date fail to understand where smith controls and where does not. Aith does not control where government uses individual exemptions or makes other exceptions that undermine rules or when it changes rules to prohibit a religious practice. Philadelphia made all three errors here. The city cannot identify a neutral, generall
Morning and case number 19123, fulton v. The city of philadelphia. Ms. Windham. Mr. Chief justice, and may it please the court. The courts below made a simple error. They failed to understand where Employment Division versus smith controls and what doesnt. Smith doesnt control when the government uses a system of individualized exemptions or when it makes other exceptions that undermined its rules or when it changes the rules to prohibit a religious practice. Philadelphia made all three of those errors here. The city still cant identify a neutral, generally applicable attempts. Fter six it now acknowledges its decisions are subjective and individualized. Yet the courts below still applied smith. Even set Smith Wouldve be a dead letter if petitioners prevail. That. That demonstrates the confusion and instability smith has caused. Respondents, rather than defend smith, asked the court for new limited constitutional standard thats even less protective of religious exercise. That approach
Would like to purchase it for the celebration of our marriage. The colorado law would prohibit that but you claim that you are entitled to an exception . Absolutely not. The compelled speech doctrine is triggered by compelled speech and in the context of a premade cake, that is not compelled speech. Mr. Phillips is happy to sell anything in his store. Didnt he express himself when he made it . Yes. He did express himself when he made it. The purpose for which he expressed it is important to the compelled speech doctrine and how it applies. Can i get the answer . If you agree, why can he not refuse to sell the cake in the window according to the hypothetical . It has already been placed in the stream of commerce. His speech has been completed. He intended to speak through the cake with the purpose of whatever it was when he created it. When he has a different purpose and is expressing a message through the cake, it would render a different result. Didnt he refused to sell cupcakes that
Students can work o loan or in a group of up to three to produce a five to seven minute documentary. A grand prize of 5,000 will go to the student or team with the best overall enry. 100,000 in cash prizes will be award and shared between 150 students and 53 teachers. January 20, 2017, our deadline. For more information about the competition, go to our website. Next, a discussion on how Senate Republicans handle the Merrick Garland nomination and whats ahead for the Supreme Court. This is about 90 minutes. Good afternoon. Im jenny sloan, the president of the constitution project. I want to welcome you all here today. The constitution project specializes in creating bipartisan consensus on controversial constitutional issues. It has been a tough go for all of us over the past several months but the constitution project has been able to continue to create this bipartisan consensus. We expect that we are going to be able to do so over the next four years, eight years and beyond. So we are