“DUP’s Donaldson hails victory for ‘freedom of expression’ after European Court declares Ashers ‘gay cake’ case inadmissible; Gareth Lee’s legal team to consider fresh domestic case”: Ralph Hewitt of The Belfast Telegraph has this report.
Kaya Burgess of The Times of London reports that “‘Gay cake’ activist loses legal fight against Ashers bakery.”
Haroon Siddique of The Guardian (UK) has a report headlined “‘Gay cake’ row: man loses seven-year battle against Belfast bakery; ECHR says Gareth Lee’s case against bakery that refused to make cake with ‘support gay marriage’ message is inadmissible.”
Chiara Giordano of The Independent (UK) reports that “‘Gay cake’ legal challenge thrown out by European Court of Human Rights; Gareth Lee failed to ‘exhaust domestic remedies’ in seven-year legal case against Christian bakers who refused to make cake with pro-gay marriage slogan, court rules.”
And Molly Quell of Courthouse News Service reports that “Rights court rejects gay discrimination claim in British cake case; The case from the United Kingdom follows a similar recipe to one in the United States where a Colorado baker said freedom of religion protected him from designing a gay couple’s wedding cake.”
You can access today’s ruling of the European Court of Human Rights at this link.
“Backbone of Biden’s pandemic response faces high court dissection; The fate of a federal plan to bring American workers through the pandemic has met challenges from a swath of red states and industry groups opposed to vaccine mandates”: Kelsey Reichmann of Courthouse News Service has this report.
“Supreme Court is set to review Biden’s vaccine rules for businesses, health-care workers”: Ann E. Marimow and Robert Barnes of The Washington Post have this report.
“A Supreme Court Ruling Against Vaccine Mandates Could Be Disastrous for Public Health”: Law professor Wendy Parmet has this guest essay online at The New York Times.
“The Vaccine Mandate Case May Mark the End of the ‘Work-Around’ Era; It gives the Supreme Court an opportunity to revive the separation of powers”: David B. Rivkin Jr. and Andrew M. Grossman will have this op-ed in Friday’s edition of The Wall Street Journal.
“Supreme Stakes on Vaccine Mandates: The Court’s ruling will echo far beyond the current pandemic.” This editorial will appear in Friday’s edition of The Wall Street Journal.
“California’s war on breakfast wages on, and Iowa farmers need justices to act; The Supreme Court should review a challenge to the state’s law dictating how bacon and eggs are produced elsewhere”: U.S. Senator Chuck Grassley (R-IA) has this essay online at The Des Moines Register.
“The Court and the ‘vaccination wars'”: Lyle Denniston has this blog post.
“The Hidden Agenda Behind the Attack on Vaccine Mandates: Six Republican-appointed justices may use these cases to seize power from the president and Congress.” Mark Joseph Stern has this jurisprudence essay online at Slate.
“Conservative Judges Are Exploiting the Pandemic to Rewrite the First Amendment; Courts considering vaccine mandate challenges are quickly transforming religious liberty into Christian supremacy”: Lisa Needham has this post at Balls and Strikes.
“Court restores signature rules that hinder Ga. third-party candidates; 11th Circuit reverses ruling lowering Georgia signature requirements”: Mark Niesse of The Atlanta Journal-Constitution has this report.
Megan Butler of Courthouse News Service reports that “11th Circuit reinstates Georgia ballot-access rules for third parties; The Atlanta-based appeals court reversed a federal judge’s decision to temporarily lower signature requirements for third-party candidates from 5% to 1% of registered voters in the district.”
And at “Ballot Access News,” Richard Winger has a post titled “Eleventh Circuit Upholds Georgia’s 5% Petition for U.S. House Independent and Minor Party Candidates.”
You can access yesterday’s ruling of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit at this link.
“5th Circ. Smokes Texas BBQ Joint’s COVID Coverage Claims”: Lauren Berg of Law360 has this report (subscription required for access) on a ruling that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit issued yesterday in a case in which Terry Black’s Barbecue was the plaintiff-appellant.
“Supreme Court Names Director of Public Information Office”: Court News Ohio has this report.
“Can a Christian flag fly at city hall? The Supreme Court will have to decide.” Mark Satta has this essay online at The Conversation.
“Supreme Court to Weigh Vaccine Requirements for the Workplace; Justices to consider whether Biden administration can enforce rules for private employers and healthcare workers”: Brent Kendall and Jess Bravin of The Wall Street Journal have this report.
And Greg Stohr of Bloomberg News reports that “Biden’s Shots-for-Millions Rule Hinges on Supreme Court Showdown.”
“Federal appeals court to hear narrow challenge to Texas abortion law on Friday; In December, the U.S. Supreme Court left the law largely intact, allowing only a challenge against medical licensing officials to proceed; An appeals court will now consider whether to send the case to the Texas Supreme Court”: Eleanor Klibanoff of The Texas Tribune has this report.
“Penn Law professor Amy Wax’s anti-Asian comments spark national scrutiny”: Jared Mitovich of The Daily Pennsylvanian has this report.
Christine Charnosky of The Legal Intelligencer reports that “Penn Law Dean, Philadelphia Bar Association Condemn Professor Amy Wax’s ‘Thoroughly Anti-Intellectual and Racist Comments’; Amy Wax, a professor at the University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School, has once again drawn the ire of the school’s dean and others, this time for making derogatory remarks about what she called ‘Asian elite’ in the United States.”
Brahmjot Kaur of NBC News reports that “Penn Law rebukes professor who said U.S. would be ‘better off with fewer Asians’; ‘Like all racist generalizations, Wax’s comments inflict harm by perpetuating stereotypes and placing differential burdens on Asian students, faculty, and staff,’ the dean wrote.”
Alisha Ebrahimji of CNN reports that “Penn Law’s dean calls professor’s comments ‘anti-intellectual’ and ‘racist’ after she said the US is ‘better off with fewer Asians.’”
And at “Above the Law,” Joe Patrice has a post titled “Law Professor Amy Wax Expands Racism Portfolio To Declare That America Needs ‘Fewer Asians.’”
The comments at issue can be accessed here and here.
“Can John Roberts Save the Supreme Court From Itself? The chief justice’s veiled end-of-year remarks seem to indicate that if the high court cannot reform itself, reform will be forced upon it.” Matt Ford has this essay online at The New Republic.
