Quiz #88 -- Refusal to grant exemptions -- Is that proper?

Religion Law Quiz #88

 

In Fulton v. City of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, 141 S. Ct. 1868, 1878 (2021) the regulations adopted by Philadelphia “incorporates a system of individual exemptions, made available in this case at the ‘sole discretion’ of the Commissioner. The City has made clear that the Commissioner ‘has no intention of granting an exception’ to” Catholic Social Services.  Id. (citations omitted).  Was the City of Philadelphia in the right to take this position?    

 

(Scroll down for the answer)

 

Answer:  No.  As the Supreme Court said, “the City ‘may not refuse to extend that [exemption] system to cases of ‘religious hardship’ without compelling reason.”  Fulton v. City of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, 141 S. Ct. 1868, 1878 (2021) (citation omitted). 

 

Disclaimer: The Religion Law Quizzes are provided as a service to you. They are intended only for educational purposes. Nothing in the Quizzes is intended to be legal advice and they should not be relied upon as conclusive on any issue discussed therein.

 

HERE IS AN AI GENERATED SUMMARY OF TODAY’S PODCAST

 

 

Welcome to another insightful episode of Religion Law Podcast. In this episode, our host, Michael Fielding, dissects the Fulton v. City of Philadelphia Supreme Court decision from 2021. A significant case concerning religious freedom and law regulations adopted by the City of Philadelphia, that stirred much contemplation and discussion.

In this judgment, the City of Philadelphia established a system of individual exemptions, made available at the sole discretion of the Commissioner. Interestingly, the Commissioner expressly stated that no exemption would be granted to Catholic social services. This led to the big question - was the city of Philadelphia right in taking this stance?

Many held their views, but here's what the Supreme Court thought - the city was not in the right. The Supreme Court emphasised that if a law significantly burdens the exercise of religion, the government must have a compelling reason for it. The ruling that discretionary determination by a commissioner does not constitute a compelling reason was a key takeaway from the Fulton v. City of Philadelphia decision.

Tune into this riveting episode as we continue dissecting this on Religion Law Quiz number 89. The Religion Law Quizzes intention purely lies in educating listeners about religious freedom and other religion law-related topics in a fun, question-and-answer-style format.

We hope this episode leaves you with some food for thought around religion laws and their complexities. Don't forget to share it with others and leave a review if you find it helpful. Until next time, keep learning and keep influencing for the better.

Episode Transcript

(00:01):
Welcome to another episode of the Religion Law Podcast, where you learn about
religious freedom and other religion law-related topics through a short question-and-answer format.
I'm your host, Michael Fielding.
Let's see how you do on today's quiz.
Welcome to Religion Law Quiz number 88, numero ochenta ocho. in Fulton v.

(00:25):
City of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, the Supreme Court decision from 2021 that
we have been talking about,
the regulations adopted by the City of Philadelphia incorporated a system of
individual exemptions made available in the case at the sole discretion of the Commissioner.
The City made clear that the Commissioner had no intention of granting an exception

(00:48):
to Catholic social services.
Now, was the city of Philadelphia in the right to take this position?
What do you think? You had a situation where you have this regulatory framework
and it allowed individualized exemptions made at the sole discretion of a commissioner.

(01:11):
And the commissioner said, hey, there is absolutely not going to be any exception
granted to Catholic social services.
And the question is, was the city of Philadelphia in the right in doing that?
What do you think? Well, regardless of what you think, here's what the Supreme Court thought of that.

(01:33):
And the Supreme Court said the city was not in the right.
The Supreme Court said, quote, the city may not refuse used to extend that exemption
system to cases of religious hardship without compelling reason, close quote.
So we see here that the Supreme Court is emphasizing or really focusing on the

(01:57):
fact that if you are going to have a law that substantially burdens the exercise of religion,
you, the government, have to have a compelling reason to do so.
And the fact that it was kind of whimsical or discretionary at the determination
of the commissioner meant that there was not a compelling reason if the commissioner

(02:19):
just decided, no, I'm not going to do it.
All right. That's another key point from the Fulton v. City of Philadelphia decision.
We will continue our discussion of this case in Religion Law Quiz number 89.
Thank you for listening to today's episode. Remember, Religion Law Quizzes are

(02:40):
for educational purposes only, and are not intended to be relied upon as legal advice.
If you have found this episode to be helpful, please share it and leave a review.
Until we meet again, keep being an influence for good.
Music.