Thread by @chrisgeidner

Breaking: The Supreme Court rejects conservative states' challenges to the ACA on standing grounds. Opinion by Breyer for the 7-2 majority. Alito and Gorsuch dissent. supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf…

That opinion being from Breyer means any remaining opinions released today — and there will be at least one more — will be from Breyer, Thomas, or the Chief Justice.

Thomas concurs, defending the majority against Alito's dissent.

Second #SCOTUS decision is in Nestle v. Doe, reversing the 9th Circuit in an Alien Tort Statute case. Thomas writes for the 8-1 Court. Alito dissents. supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf…

There will be at least one more decision this morning, coming from either Thomas or the Chief Justice.

To go back to the ACA decision for a second, Alito, joined by Gorusch, would have thrown everything out. From Alito's dissent:

Anyway, for now, awaiting the next opinion.

Breaking: The Supreme Court holds that Philadelphia's refusal to contract with Catholic Social Services, despite its refusal to certify same-sex couples, violates the Free Exercise Clause. There are no dissents; Chief Justice Roberts writes the majority opinion.

A complex make-up here, though: supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf…

That is the final #SCOTUS decision today.

Now, to wade into Fulton.

Today's case, Fulton, is about same-sex parents, a Catholic foster agency, and anti-discrimination law, but the opinions are more broadly about a big debate over the Free Exercise Clause and a 1990 #SCOTUS decision, Employment Division v. Smith. Here's how Roberts sums things up:

Here, in short, the majority finds that Philadelphia doesn't have a "generally applicable" policy because it allows for exceptions. As such, strict scrutiny applies and the failure to grant CSS an exception "cannot survive."

That decision, though, is tough to reach, as Gorsuch details in his concurrence. In order to get there, Roberts and the majority had to find a way to write out of the picture BOTH a public accommodations nondiscrimination ordinance AND a foster care nondiscrim requirement.

They did so in order to avoid the issue of overruling Smith. Five justices (at least) think Smith is bad law and said so today. Two of the five (Barrett and Kavanaugh), however, agreed with Roberts that they didn't need to overrule it today.

Barrett, in the portion of her decision joined by both Kavanaugh and Breyer, voiced concerns about what would replace Smith when Free Exercise claims come before courts.

Gorsuch counters that the court needn't have a "grand unified theory" of the Free Exercise Clause to overrule Smith.

Nonetheless, that avoidance managed to win the day. But, as Alito and Gorsuch point out, it doesn't end the issue — in Philly or elsewhere. Philly can get rid of the exemption, which it said it had never used anyway, and then we're back at square one. And, there are other cases.

In sum, be careful when you hear people talking about today's foster care decision as "unanimous." Yes, it was, as to the specific policies in place in the case and the ultimate result that Philly can't bar CSS from the foster program given *those* policies. But, this isn't over.

It's not over as to Philadelphia, and the larger question about how the Free Exercise Clause in the First Amendment works — specifically, what to do with Employment Division v. Smith — also remains unresolved.

With 15 cases left to decide, including voting rights, student speech rights, and the NCAA case, #SCOTUS announces three decision days next week: Monday, Wednesday, and Friday.