Amy Howe

Jan 18 2022

Over Gorsuch dissent, justices deny review in dispute over definition of “minister” for tax-exemption purposes

After adding five cases to its merits docket for the spring on Friday, the Supreme Court on Tuesday morning issued more orders from the justices’ private conference last week. As expected, the justices did not grant any new cases. Perhaps most notably, they once again did not act on a pair of petitions challenging the consideration of race in the undergraduate admissions process at Harvard University and the University of North Carolina, nor did they act on a petition filed by a website designer who does not want to design custom wedding websites for same-sex couples.

The justices called for the federal government’s views in Johnson v. Bethany Hospice and Palliative Care, a dispute over pleading standards in cases brought under the False Claims Act, which prohibits the submission of fraudulent claims to the government. There is no deadline for the U.S. solicitor general to file the government’s brief in the case.

The justices denied review in Trustees of the New Life in Christ Church v. City of Fredericksburg, Virginia, a challenge to the city’s denial of a property tax exemption for a property owned by the church and occupied by a couple whom the church designated as its “ministers.” When the city disputed the designation, the church asked the justices to weigh in on whether the city’s reliance on its own interpretation of church doctrine to overrule the church’s interpretation of what constitutes a minister  violated the First Amendment.

After considering the case at eight consecutive conferences, the justices turned down the church’s request on Tuesday. Justice Neil Gorsuch dissented from that decision, explaining that he would not only grant the church’s petition for review but also rule in its favor even without additional briefing and oral argument on the merits. “The First Amendment,” Gorsuch stressed, “does not permit bureaucrats or judges to ‘subject’ religious beliefs ‘to verification.’”

The justices will meet again for another private conference on Friday. It is their last regularly scheduled conference before they begin a month-long winter recess.

This post is 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
  • Court declines to block execution of Texas man who argued that jurors engaged in anti-Hispanic bias
  • Court schedules final two argument sessions of 2022-23 term
  • Justices request federal government’s views on Texas and Florida social-media laws
More from Amy Howe

Recent Posts

  • Court declines to block execution of Texas man who argued that jurors engaged in anti-Hispanic bias
  • Court schedules final two argument sessions of 2022-23 term
  • Justices request federal government’s views on Texas and Florida social-media laws
  • Justices were not asked to swear under penalty of perjury that they didn’t leak Dobbs opinion
  • Supreme Court investigators fail to identify who leaked Dobbs opinion
Site built and optimized by Sound Strategies