6/4/17  //  In-Depth Analysis

Regulatory changes that the Trump-Pence Administration reportedly plans to implement extend well beyond our religious liberty traditions (and beyond accommodations authorized by the Supreme Court)

6/2/17  //  In-Depth Analysis

A draft of the Trump Administration's revised contraception mandate has been leaked. If implemented, this policy would weaken civil rights for women. Moreover, the plan could violate the Establishment Clause by providing a religious accommodation for some private citizens only by shifting costs to others who may not share their beliefs.

6/2/17  //  Commentary

The budget for the Civil Rights Division underscores how the administration will turn a blind eye toward many forms of discrimination while stoking anti-immigrant sentiment.

6/1/17  //  Commentary

The Trump Department of Health and Human Services has proposed a massive expansion of the program that provides employers and exemption from providing their employees with contraceptive coverage. But they have not sought notice-and-comment on the rule, and that could be a major problem.

6/1/17  //  Commentary

On a new episode of Versus Trump, Take Care's podcast, Easha and Jason dig into healthcare for the first time, as they take a deep dive into the House v. Price litigation that addresses whether certain payments to insurers under the Affordable Care Act have been properly appropriated. They also debate immigration rhetoric vs. action and discuss drug testing for unemployment benefits. Listen now!

5/30/17  //  In-Depth Analysis

The president’s proposed budget reveals an intent to roll back protections for the most vulnerable members of society.

5/30/17  //  In-Depth Analysis

A detailed guide to how and when the Muslim Ban might reach the Supreme Court (and why this question really matters).

5/25/17  //  Commentary

On a new episode of Versus Trump, Take Care's podcast, we discuss the status of G.G. v. Gloucester County School Board, a major case about transgender rights, and then speak with Patti Goldman of Earthjustice about an important lawsuit that her organization has filed.

5/25/17  //  Commentary

Mitch Landrieu’s speech defending the removal of Confederate war monuments in the heart of New Orleans is an eloquent reminder that the Constitution forbids acts that subordinate or denigrate, whether in the context of religion, LGBT rights, or racial equality.

5/12/17  //  Commentary

President Donald Trump is known for changing his political views after a ten-minute history lesson. In this continuing feature, I encourage the president to take a few minutes to learn about the historical background of things he says. This first edition, on his signing statement regarding HBCUs, concerns one of his favorite historical topics: A nineteenth-century general who saw the Civil War coming, was angry, and did something about it.

5/11/17  //  Quick Reactions

By Jed Shugerman. Trump is using the Comey firestorm as a smoke screen for a potentially more dangerous move: appointing Kris Kobach vice chair of a new “election integrity” commission, with Mike Pence as chair. Kobach will make it a voter-suppression/vote rigging commission, fomenting anti-immigrant and racist fears.

5/11/17  //  Commentary

Higher graduation rates nationwide have left students with disabilities even further behind.

5/10/17  //  Commentary

Andrew Sullivan recently criticized gay people who seek to obtain services from those with religious objections to serving them. But Sullivan's criticism fundamentally misunderstands the basic purpose of public accommodations laws and should be rejected.

5/8/17  //  In-Depth Analysis

The Trump administration has repeatedly (and incorrectly) argued that a policy does not constitute discrimination unless the policy discriminates against all members of a particular group.

5/7/17  //  Commentary

In its Muslim Ban brief, DOJ favorably cites Palmer v. Thompson (1971)—which allowed Jackson, Mississippi to close public pools rather than integrate them. The Fourth Circuit should question DOJ about this stunning citation and make clear that Palmer, an odious ruling, has no place in anti-discrimination law today.