The Costs of Conscience and the Trump Contraception Rules

3/6/18  //  Commentary

The Constitution prohibits the government from accommodating religious practices when doing so entails undue hardship to third parties

Micah Schwartzman

University of Virginia School of Law

Nelson Tebbe

Brooklyn Law School

Richard C. Schragger

UVA School of Law

Masterpiece Cakeshop: Beware the False Equivalence

2/12/18  //  Commentary

Tolerating discrimination and tolerating the desire not to be discriminated against are simply not the same.

Guantánamo and President Trump’s Anti-Muslim Animus

1/24/18  //  Commentary

By Nimra Azmi and Sirine Shebaya: Trump's position on Guantánamo perfectly aligns with his habitual rejection of the idea that Muslims accused of terrorism are entitled to any constitutional protections

Take Care

Versus Trump: 2017 Scorecard

1/4/18  //  Uncategorized

On the first episode of Versus Trump of 2018, Jason and Charlie look back at Versus Trump cases in 2017 and score them as Administration wins, losses, or not-yet-decided. They also look ahead at big issues to come in 2018. Listen now!

Charlie Gerstein

Civil Rights Corps

Jason Harrow

Equal Citizens

Against Deference: Considering the Trump Travel Ban

12/8/17  //  Commentary

By Vicki Jackson & Judith Resnik: Upholding the third travel ban out of deference to the President on matters of foreign affairs would be a tragic mistake.

Take Care

Versus Trump: Trump Versus Anti-Discrimination Laws (with guest Joshua Matz)

12/7/17  //  In-Depth Analysis

On this week’s episode of Versus Trump, Charlie, Jason, and Easha are joined by Take Care publisher Joshua Matz to talk about the Masterpiece Cake Shop oral argument, plus the status of Muslim Ban litigation and the future of Take Care.

Easha Anand

San Francisco

Charlie Gerstein

Civil Rights Corps

Jason Harrow

Equal Citizens

What’s the Price of Tolerance?

12/7/17  //  Commentary

Robust protection of speech does not require gutting laws that help ensure that all persons—regardless of race, gender, religion, or sexual orientation—can buy the good and services they desire, free from discrimination.

Three Problems With the SG's Klan Hypo in the Masterpiece Cakeshop Oral Argument

12/6/17  //  In-Depth Analysis

If the baker loses in Masterpiece, could the government compel an African American sculptor to sculpt a cross for a Klan service? No, it could not.

Michael C. Dorf

Cornell Law School

What Masterpiece Cakeshop is Really About

12/6/17  //  In-Depth Analysis

The Alliance Defending Freedom, which represents Masterpiece Cakeshop, is not interested in a narrow exemption. Rather, ADF is taking aim at the very legitimacy of LGBT people and legal protections for them.

Douglas NeJaime

Yale Law School

Reva Siegel

Yale Law School

Complicity and Speech: The Right’s New Effort to Rewrite the First Amendment

12/4/17  //  In-Depth Analysis

Conservative legal activists have pushed a sweeping view of the First Amendment’s protection against compelled speech. These new complicity claims should fail.

Doubling Down on a Deeply Troubling Argument in Masterpiece Cakeshop

11/14/17  //  In-Depth Analysis

Tom Berg and Douglas Laycock defend a novel theory that could eviscerate civil rights laws

Jim Oleske

Lewis & Clark Law School

The First Amendment Does Not Give Commercial Businesses a License to Discriminate

11/1/17  //  In-Depth Analysis

In Masterpiece, the Petitioner's argument would wreak havoc on long established First Amendment principles, giving businesses a right to disregard content-neutral regulations of their conduct

Religious Freedom and the Masterpiece Case

10/31/17  //  In-Depth Analysis

Robbie Kaplan and I have filed a brief on behalf of Church-State Scholars addressing the Free Exercise Clause issues in this important case.

Joshua Matz


Masterpiece Cakeshop and Reading Smith Carefully: A Reply to Jim Oleske

10/30/17  //  In-Depth Analysis

Thomas C. Berg and Douglas Laycock respond to criticism of their amicus brief in the Masterpiece Cakeshop case.

Take Care

Versus Trump Emergency Pod: JD v. DHS

10/26/17  //  Commentary

On this week’s episode of Versus Trump, Easha and Charlie have a quick turn-around emergency pod to discuss an ongoing—wait, just now resolved—case filed by a pregnant 17-year-old girl in federal immigration custody who seeks an abortion. Easha and Charlie first talk about the procedural wrangling that this case has wrought and second about the legal claims in the case, which bring them into the exciting worlds of reproductive rights, immigration law, and international relations. Listen now!

Charlie Gerstein

Civil Rights Corps

Easha Anand

San Francisco