Eric Rassbach Profile picture
Oct 21 7 tweets 2 min read Read on X
Despite losing 9-0 at SCOTUS, Wisconsin still won’t take the L. State officials are defying the Court’s unanimous ruling in Catholic Charities Bureau and continuing to fight my clients in court. @becketfund just asked the Wisconsin Supreme Court to put a stop to it.
In June, all nine SCOTUS Justices rejected Wisconsin’s argument that Catholic Charities’ care for the poor and needy wasn’t religious enough to qualify for a religious exemption. becketnewsite.s3.amazonaws.com/20250605101444…
Justice Sotomayor explained that Wisconsin had violated federal law by “impos[ing] a denominational preference by differentiating between religions based on theological lines.” The Court further recognized that “whether to express and inculcate religious doctrine through worship, proselytization, or religious education when performing charitable work are, again, fundamentally theological choices driven by the content of different religious doctrines.”Page 2 of the SCOTUS Opinion in Catholic Charities Bureau v. Wisconsin Labor Industry and Review Commission: The Wisconsin Supreme Court’s application of §108.02(15)(h)(2) imposed a denominational preference by differentiating between religions based on theological lines. Because the law’s application does not survive strict scrutiny, it cannot stand.
Rather than following the Supreme Court’s ruling, Wisconsin officials are now trying to avoid it by attacking the religious exemption itself. The attorney general recently asked the state’s high court to consider axing the exemption entirely—undermining a key protection relied on by faith-based organizations across Wisconsin.
The Wisconsin Supreme Court then ordered additional briefing on the question. Becket is asking the court to stop this maneuver in its tracks. becketnewsite.s3.amazonaws.com/20251021093356…
If the state succeeds, it would harm not only Catholic Charities but also countless churches, synagogues, mosques, and other ministries that depend on the same exemption.
Rather than accepting defeat, the state is now trying to punish all religious groups in Wisconsin, not just Catholic Charities. Doubling down on excluding religious people makes a mockery of both our legal system and religious freedom.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Eric Rassbach

Eric Rassbach Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @ericrassbach

Jun 5
Here’s a little more background and analysis about today’s excellent unanimous opinion:
Most Catholic dioceses have a social ministry arm that serves those in need. Catholic Charities carries out this important work for the Diocese of Superior, Wisconsin by helping the needy regardless of their faith. This belief that ministry to those in need should not be limited to Catholics flows directly from Catholic social teaching and is embodied in the Church’s “corporal works of mercy” —which include feeding the hungry and sheltering the homeless.An individual served by Catholic Charities Bureau receives her medicine.
An individual served by Catholic Charities Bureau prepares to celebrate Valentine’s Day.
Roy, an individual served by Catholic Charities Bureau, folds laundry with an employee.
Under Wisconsin law, non-profits that are operated primarily for a religious purpose are generally exempt from the state’s unemployment compensation program. But the Wisconsin Supreme Court ruled that Catholic Charities was not exempt because it serves everyone, not just Catholics. becketfund.org/case/catholic-…
Read 11 tweets
Apr 21, 2023
This is a helpful discussion by @MAHelfand and @NDiament of what the Groff oral argument included and more importantly did not include:
It was quite fun working with them on the amicus brief we at the @PeppLaw Religious Liberty Clinic filed for @OUAdvocacy in the appeal: supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/22/2…
I highly recommend Nathan and Avi's entertaining and illuminating discussion (and our amicus brief!). A few quick additional thoughts of my own on the OA:
Read 23 tweets
Jun 21, 2022
Today’s ruling tells the state that they cannot exclude religious institutions from public benefits because they are religious. @BECKETlaw filed a friend-of-the-court brief in the case making exactly that argument: becketnewsite.s3.amazonaws.com/Becket-Carson-…
Over the coming months, much will be said about the effects of this ruling on the role of religious schools in American society. But here are a few quick observations on the opinion today:
First, this is the latest in a series of big wins at #SCOTUS for religious schools, including the Court’s decisions in @BECKETlaw cases Hosanna-Tabor and Our Lady of Guadalupe. becketlaw.org/case/our-lady-…
Read 9 tweets
Mar 21, 2022
Good news from #SCOTUS today on religious freedom for employees who seek to follow their faith.
Today in @BECKETlaw’s Hedican v. Walmart case, #SCOTUS sent the case back to the Seventh Circuit for another look after its recent decision in Cameron v. EMW Women’s Surgical Center: supremecourt.gov/orders/courtor…
@Walmart terminated Hedican’s manager position at a Wisconsin store because he could not work on Saturdays, the Sabbath for Seventh-day Adventists. Walmart did so even though swapping shifts was an easy solution that ensured everyone’s needs were met. becketlaw.org/case/hedican-v…
Read 10 tweets
Feb 6, 2021
BREAKING: #SCOTUS rules California must immediately allow houses of worship to reopen at 25% of occupancy, ending California's ban on indoor worship, which had been the only one in the country. Will add to this thread shortly.
supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf…
Court rules 6-3 that California must end the worship ban in Tier 1 counties, also known as the “purple tier”, currently 54 out of 58 counties. California can however limit houses of worship to 25% of normal occupancy in Tier 1.
Justices Thomas and Gorsuch would have granted the applications in full, which would effectively mean an end to all COVID-related restrictions on worship.
Read 19 tweets
Feb 5, 2021
The issue of clergy in the death chamber may be headed back to #SCOTUS next week. Alabama is set to execute a Christian prisoner on Feb. 11 but is refusing to allow his pastor to accompany him to the death chamber.
Last week an Alabama federal court denied the prisoner's request for clergy access, and the prisoner has now made an emergency appeal to the 11th Circuit. s3.amazonaws.com/becketnewsite/…
Regardless of who wins at the 11th Circuit, it seems likely that there will then be an emergency appeal to #SCOTUS. Of course death penalty-related appeals can evaporate quickly for other reasons so there is no guarantee this case will in fact reach #SCOTUS.
Read 9 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

:(