At issue in this case is the application of the First Amendment’s ministerial employee exception to an art teacher at a religious elementary school. Grounded in constitutionally mandated separation of church and state, the exception exempts religious institutions from all employment discrimination laws for employees deemed to be ministerial. A lower state court ruled that the teacher, who performed no “vital religious duties,” could move forward with her pregnancy and marital…

At issue in this case is a religiously affiliated, taxpayer-funded foster care agency seeking to discriminate against same-sex couples applying to be foster parents. Invoking the Free Exercise Clause, the agency claims that its religious beliefs about same-sex marriage supplant a local anti-discrimination law’s prohibition on sexual orientation discrimination. In rejecting this claim, ADL’s amicus brief asserts that the sought exemption is not permitted by the Free Exercise Clause…

At issue in this case is a business that seeks a religious exemption from a state anti-discrimination law for the purpose of denying wedding-related services to LGBTQ couples. It, however, does not currently sell such services and there is no allegation that the business violated the law. ADL joined a legal brief filed by religious and civil rights organizations asserting that the business’ lawsuit is premature. Even if it was not, the requested exemption is not required by the Free…

At stake in this case are the administration’s final rules on religious and moral objections to the Affordable Care Act’s (ACA’s) contraceptive mandate. The federal court issued a nationwide injunction blocking the new rules, which would effectively repeal the contraceptive mandate and broadly allow employers and universities to invoke religion or morality to block their employees’ and students’ contraceptive coverage that is otherwise guaranteed by the ACA. On…

At stake in this case are the administration’s final rules on religious and moral objections to the Affordable Care Act’s (ACA’s) contraceptive mandate. The federal court issued a nationwide injunction blocking the new rules, which would effectively repeal the contraceptive mandate and broadly allow employers and universities to invoke religion or morality to block their employees’ and students’ contraceptive coverage that is otherwise guaranteed by the ACA. On…

At issue in this case is the constitutionality of a Pennsylvania House of Representatives policy barring nontheists from serving as guest chaplains to offer the Chamber’s daily invocation. ADL’s brief asserts that the policy is unconstitutional for two reasons. First, it violates longstanding Establishment Clause precedent prohibiting government from preferring one religion over others. Second, the House’s justification that historically nontheists have not given invocations…

At stake in this case are two interim final rules (IFRs) promulgated by the Trump Administration in October 2017 that significantly broadened the religious exemption to the Affordable Care Act’s (ACA) contraception mandate. Prior mandate regulations accommodated houses of worship and religiously affiliated organizations. The new exemption, however, effectively repeals the contraception mandate, broadly allowing employers and universities to invoke religion or morality to block their…

At stake in this case are two interim final rules (IFRs) promulgated by the Trump administration in October 2017 that significantly broadened the religious exemption to the Affordable Care Act’s (ACA) contraception mandate. Prior mandate regulations accommodated houses of worship and religiously affiliated organizations. The new exemption, however, effectively repeals the contraception mandate, broadly allowing employers and universities to invoke religion or morality to block their…

At issue in this case is the constitutionality of the U.S. House of Representatives’ guest chaplain policy. Because the policy requires guest chaplains to offer a prayer that addresses a “higher power,” as well as to be ordained clergy, it bars non-theists from the invocation opportunity. A Humanist leader challenged the policy under the Constitution’s Establishment Clause. ADL joined a coalition brief asserting that policy is unconstitutional for four reasons. First,…

At issue in this case is the constitutionality of a county commission policy prohibiting non-theists from offering the opening prayer at commission meetings. A lower ruled that the policy violated the Establishment Clause to the First Amendment. ADL filed a brief on behalf of a diverse group of religious and civil rights organizations. The brief asserts that policy is unconstitutional for four reasons. First, it plainly violates the U.S. Supreme Court’s non-discrimination requirement for…