10 Case Laws to Know

[featured_image]
  • Version
  • Download 98
  • File Size 0.00 KB
  • File Count 0
  • Create Date February 4, 2022
  • Last Updated June 23, 2022

10 Case Laws to Know

CASE LAW:

 

  1.  “[E]ven in a pandemic, the Constitution cannot be put away and forgotten.” Roman Catholic Diocese of Brooklyn v. Cuomo, 141 S. Ct. 63, 68 (2021)

 

  1. “The loss of First Amendment freedoms, for even minimal periods of time, unquestionably constitutes irreparable injury.” Elrod v. Burns 427 U.S. 347, 373 (1976).

 

  1. “Government action “that discriminates against some or all religious beliefs or regulates or prohibits conduct because it is undertaken for religious reasons” is unlawful. Church of the Lukumi Babalu Aye, Inc. v. City of Hialeah, 508 U.S. 520, 532 (1993).

 

  1. “The government “must do more than simply posit the existence of the disease sought to be cured. It must demonstrate that the recited harms are real, not merely conjectural.” Turner Broad. Sys., Inc. v. FCC, 512 U.S. 622, 664 (1994).

 

  1. The “exercise of religion” includes “‘any exercise of religion, whether or not compelled by, or central to, a system of religious belief’.” Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc. 573 U.S. 682 (2014) (quoting 42 U.S.C. § 2000cc-5(7)(A)).

 

  1. The Free Exercise Clause “protect[s] religious observers against unequal treatment” and against “laws that impose special disabilities on the basis of religious status.” Espinoza v. Mont. Dep’t of Revenue, 140 S. Ct. 2246, 2254 (2020).

 

  1. In 1993, Congress enacted RFRA “to provide very broad protection for religious liberty.” Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc. 573 U.S. 682, 693 (2014).

 

  1. While “[t]he military enclave is kept free of partisan influence, . . . individual servicemen are not isolated from participation as citizens in our democratic process.” Greer v. Spock, 424 U.S. 828, (1976).

 

  1. The Supreme Court has unanimously held that “citizens in uniform may not be stripped of basic rights simply because they have doffed their civilian clothes.” Chappell v. Wallace, 462 U.S. 296, 304, (1983).

 

  1. The Supreme Court "readily acknowledge[s] that a law rarely survives such scrutiny . . .”. Burson v. Freeman, 504 U.S. 191, 200 (1992). Indeed, the “standard is not watered down; it really means what it says.” Tandon v. Newsom, 141 S. Ct. 1294, 1298 (2021).

Attached Files