Ep. 02: Supreme Court case on gov’t funding of religion: Espinoza v. Montana Department of Revenue

BJC Podcast

BJC Podcast에서 제공하는 콘텐츠입니다. 에피소드, 그래픽, 팟캐스트 설명을 포함한 모든 팟캐스트 콘텐츠는 BJC Podcast 또는 해당 팟캐스트 플랫폼 파트너가 직접 업로드하고 제공합니다. 누군가가 귀하의 허락 없이 귀하의 저작물을 사용하고 있다고 생각되는 경우 여기에 설명된 절차를 따르실 수 있습니다 https://ko.player.fm/legal.

5y ago 45:59

MP3•에피소드 홈

Why is religion treated differently by our Constitution? In a blockbuster year at the Supreme Court, BJC Executive Director Amanda Tyler and General Counsel Holly Hollman examine one case that could have major implications for religious liberty law. They dig deeper into Espinoza v. Montana Department of Revenue (starting at 1:50), talk about what people mean when they say “Blaine amendments,” explain the footnote of a previous decision that came up during oral arguments (18:20), and share their predictions for the decision. They also point out the links between this case and other events, including a troubling proposal released by President Trump during his State of the Union address (29:31). In the final segment, Amanda and Holly review how Supreme Court news continues to dominate religious liberty conversations and note how religion is being treated in news about the coronavirus (39:57). See the show notes for more details.

The post Ep. 02: Supreme Court case on gov’t funding of religion: Espinoza v. Montana Department of Revenue appeared first on BJC.

76 에피소드