The Supreme Court will decide three cases that ask a question you should be offended to hear still asked today: may an employer fire a worker for being gay? The answer in most states, including Florida, is yes.
A partisan firestorm erupted in the waning days of this year’s legislative session after Republicans tacked onto the elections package provisions aimed at implementing the voter-approved constitutional amendment that restores the voting rights of felons who have completed their sentences.
A bill in Texas would allow professionals of all kinds — doctors, pharmacists, electricians — to deny services to LGBTQ customers on religious grounds, a consequence of a recurring misinterpretation of law.
The Supreme Court in its wedding-cake ruling declared gays once again second-class citizens, at least when their sexuality has to compete with someone else’s more stone-throwing version of Christianity.
Sen. Jeff Brandes has repeatedly introduced measures that would prohibit driver’s license suspensions for non-driving offenses. But Clerks of court stand to lose $40 million annually if the law is modified.
Invoking Christian belief to deny service to a gay couple is not a First Amendment right, nor is it a matter of artistic expression. It’s good old discrimination under a new mask.
The president called Joe Arpaio, a man who chronically violated people’s constitutional rights, a “patriot.” What does that make his victims?
The drop means fewer interactions between police and drivers, potentially limiting dangerous clashes. But black and Hispanic drivers are still searched at higher rates than white motorists.
A customer had accused an Orlando bakery of religious discrimination when the owners refused to make a cake with the words “Homosexuality is an abomination unto the Lord.”
In banning newcomers from seven countries from entering the United States for the next 90 days, the president has used language that will affect those who are in the U.S. already on visas and green cards.