Amy Howe

Aug 30 2018

Divided court stays out of foster care dispute

The Supreme Court today declined to intervene in a dispute between the city of Philadelphia and Catholic Social Services over foster care and the Catholic Church’s position on same-sex marriage. Catholic Social Services had asked the justices to block an “intake freeze” on the new placements of foster children in the agency’s foster-care program while it appeals a district court’s ruling to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 3rd Circuit, but the Supreme Court denied the agency’s request. Three justices – Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito and Neil Gorsuch – indicated that they would have granted the agency’s application, leaving the agency two votes short of the five that it would have needed.

The events giving rise to the lawsuit began last spring, when the city’s department of human services suspended new placements of foster children in CSS’ foster-care program because the agency refused to certify same-sex couples who wanted to be foster parents. CSS went to federal district court, arguing that the policy violates its right to freely exercise its religion. After a three-day hearing, the district court denied the agency’s request for temporary relief, and the 3rd Circuit rejected the agency’s request to put the freeze on hold while it reviews the agency’s appeal.

CSS then went to the Supreme Court for relief, telling the justices that if they do not step in, the city’s “vindictive conduct will lead to displaced children, empty homes, and the closure of a 100-year-old ministry,” while the city will not be harmed at all. The city countered that it is simply putting conditions on how government foster-care funds can be spent, and here CSS’ contract with the city requires it to comply with the city’s nondiscrimination policies and laws.

This post was also published on SCOTUSblog.

Amy L Howe
Until September 2016, Amy served as the editor and reporter for SCOTUSblog, a blog devoted to coverage of the Supreme Court of the United States; she continues to serve as an independent contractor and reporter for SCOTUSblog. Before turning to full-time blogging, she served as counsel in over two dozen merits cases at the Supreme Court and argued two cases there. From 2004 until 2011, she co-taught Supreme Court litigation at Stanford Law School; from 2005 until 2013, she co-taught a similar class at Harvard Law School. She has also served as an adjunct professor at American University’s Washington College of Law and Vanderbilt Law School. Amy is a graduate of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and holds a master’s degree in Arab Studies and a law degree from Georgetown University.
Tweets by @AHoweBlogger
Recent ScotusBlog Posts from Amy
  • Venezuelan TPS recipients tell justices to let status stand
  • Government asks justices to allow DHS to revoke parole for a half-million noncitizens
  • Supreme Court allows Trump to ban transgender people from military
More from Amy Howe

Recent Posts

  • Court appears to back legality of HHS preventative care task force
  • Justices take up Texas woman’s claim against USPS
  • Supreme Court considers parents’ efforts to exempt children from books with LGBTQ themes
  • Justices temporarily bar government from removing Venezuelan men under Alien Enemies Act
  • Court hears challenge to ACA preventative-care coverage
Site built and optimized by Sound Strategies