Another Supreme Court victory for religious organizations | Domestic and World
Washington (AP) – Thursday judges in another victory for religious organizations at the Supreme Court Unanimously in agreement with the Catholic host families In short, this religious vision hinders cooperation with homosexual couples. The court said the city of Philadelphia had mistakenly restricted its relationship with the group due to agency policy.
The ruling was specific to the facts of the case and avoided the larger question of how to balance religious freedom and anti-discrimination law. Instead, the result focused on the wording of the city’s foster parent contract. The three Conservative judges reportedly went further, and the LGBTQ group said it was relieved that the decisions were limited.
Justice John Roberts told the majority of courts that Catholic Social Services “only seek housing that allows the children of Philadelphia to continue to serve in a manner consistent with their religious beliefs. I’m not trying to force these beliefs on someone else. “
Roberts concluded that Philadelphia “refusing to contract with CSS to provide foster care services unless they agree to recognize same-sex couples as foster parents is in violation of the First Amendment.”
Roberts said he never asked for same-sex couples to work with Catholic social services affiliated with the Archdiocese of Philadelphia. If that happens, the couple will be referred to one of 20 other institutions working with same-sex couples, Catholic social services said.
“For more than 50 years, CSS has successfully signed a contract with the city to provide foster care services while adhering to these beliefs,” said one of the seven tribunal members who attended a Catholic or Catholic school . said Roberts.
Because of this belief, Catholic institutions do not even recognize unmarried couples.
In recent years, religious groups have been happy to win in court, and in many cases there is a big difference. It is the court that takes care of it. Lifting of the ban on state aid for religious educationGave a religious school More room to hire and fire teachers And authorized Crossing to stay in the public domain.. Recently, courts have repeatedly supported religious groups in the dispute over the restriction of the coronavirus.
Philadelphia learned from a reporter in 2018 that the Catholic Social Welfare Department does not allow same-sex couples to become foster parents. The city said it needed a foster parent agency to cooperate and not discriminate under the contract. The city asked Catholic Social Services to change its policy, but the group refused.
As a result, Philadelphia has discontinued referrals to dispensers for additional children. Catholic social services have complained, Lower courtyard ally of Philadelphia.
When Philadelphia came to the conclusion that he had acted inappropriately, Roberts said the city had given the Catholic Welfare Department the ability to “reduce its mission or approve relationships that contradict its beliefs.” Declared.
He also underlined the words of the city’s standard foster parent contract. The contract states that the agency cannot refuse prospective adoptive or adoptive parents on the basis of their sexual orientation “unless exceptions are granted”. Roberts concluded that the city could not deny the exemption from Catholic social services because it created a process to grant the exemption.
The outcome of the case is Decision 2018 The court backed a Colorado bakery that didn’t make wedding cakes for same-sex couples. The ruling was also limited to the specific facts of the case, avoiding the more important issue of how to balance religious freedom and anti-discrimination law. But since that decision, the courts have become more conservative.
Leslie Cooper, deputy director of the LGBTQ & HIV project of the American Civil Liberties Union, said: “In both cases the courts maintain non-discriminatory laws and policies and make them fully enforceable by the government, narrow and very strict. . We made a factual decision. For the Philadelphia team.
Three Tory judges who joined Roberts’ opinion said they would have gone further. Justices Samuel Alito, Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch said they would have rejected the 1990 Supreme Court ruling that they improperly admitted restrictions on religious freedom.
Arito called Thursday’s court ruling a “fragment of the decision.” Gorsuch said it was a “(no) solution” and predicted the process would continue, possibly with the city rewriting the contract.
Philadelphia attorney Diana Cortez said the decision was a “difficult and disappointing setback.”
In a statement, she said the court “overturned the city’s decision that indiscriminate policies were in the best interests of the children who care for them.” But she also said the city was “satisfied” that the judge “did not radically change the existing judge”. A constitution that adopts standards that enforce court-ordered religious exemptions from citizens’ obligations in all areas. “
An attorney for the Beckett Religious Freedom Foundation, who claimed the case on behalf of Catholic welfare, called it a “common sense move in favor of religious welfare.”
“The Supreme Court has confirmed that CSS has done a great job for many years and can continue to do so in the city of Philadelphia,” said Lori Wyndham.
Associated Press writer Mark Sherman contributed to this report.
Source link Another Supreme Court victory for religious organizations | Domestic and World