{"id":250130,"date":"2021-06-22T14:50:34","date_gmt":"2021-06-22T09:20:34","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=250130"},"modified":"2021-06-28T17:59:06","modified_gmt":"2021-06-28T12:29:06","slug":"child-slavery-by-nestle","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/06\/22\/child-slavery-by-nestle\/","title":{"rendered":"Whether Nestl\u00e9 and Cargill will be liable for child slavery? SCOTUS decides in 8-1 majority ruling"},"content":{"rendered":"<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS): <\/strong>In 8-1 majority, Thomas, J., announced the judgment of the Court and delivered the opinion of the Court with respect to Parts I and II, in which Roberts, CJ., and Breyer, Sotomayor, Kagan, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, and Barrett, JJ., joined, and an opinion with respect to Part III, in which Gorsuch and Kavanaugh, JJ., joined. Gorsuch, J., filed a concurring opinion, in which Alito, J., joined as to Part I, and in which Kavanaugh, J., joined as to Part II. Sotomayor, J., filed an opinion concurring in part and concurring in the judgment, in which Breyer and Kagan, JJ., joined. Alito \u00a0J. filed a dissenting opinion.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><u>Factual Matrix<\/u><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Respondents alleged that they were trafficked into Ivory Coast as <strong>child slaves <\/strong>to produce cocoa.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">It was stated that U. S. based companies Nestl\u00e9 USA, Inc., and Cargill, Inc., do not own or operate cocoa farms in Ivory Coast, but they do buy cocoa from farms located there and provide those farms with technical and financial resources.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><em>Alien Tort Statute<\/em><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Respondents sued Nestle, Cargill and others under the Alien Tort Statute (ATS) which provides the Federal Court&#8217;s jurisdiction to hear claims brought by an alien for a tort only, committed in violation of the law of nations or a treaty of the United States contending that the said arrangement aids and abets child slavery.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">District Court had dismissed the suit after this court held that the ATS does not apply extraterritorially.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Ninth Circuit let this suit proceed as respondents pleaded as a general matter that \u201cevery major operational decision by both companies is made in or approved in the U.S. and allegations of general corporate activity, like decision making cannot alone establish domestic application of the ATS.<\/p>\n<blockquote><p><em>our precedents are clear that creating a cause of action to enforce international law beyond three historical torts invariably gives rise to foreign-policy concerns.<\/em><\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>JUSTICE GORSUCH, with whom JUSTICE ALITO joins as to Part I, and with whom JUSTICE KAVANAUGH joins as to Part II, concurring.<\/strong><\/p>\n<ul style=\"text-align: justify;\">\n<li>Notion that Corporations are immune from suit under the ATS cannot be reconciled with the statutory text and original understanding.<\/li>\n<li>The time has come to jettison the misguided notion that courts have discretion to create new causes of action under the ATS<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Bench stated that causes of action in tort normally focus on wrongs and injuries, not who is responsible for them.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Further, it was stated that the real problem with the present lawsuit and others like it isn\u2019t whether the defendant happens to be a corporation., it\u2019s this: <strong>Just as the ATS nowhere privileges corporations, it nowhere deputizes the Judiciary to create new causes of action. Rather, the statute confers \u201cjurisdiction\u201d on federal courts to adjudicate \u201ctort\u201d claims by aliens for violations \u201cof the law of nations.\u201d<\/strong><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>This Court has never\u2014not once in 230 years\u2014invoked the ATS to create a new cause of action.<\/strong><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">In <em>Sosa <\/em>v. <em>Alvarez-Machain<\/em>, 542 U. S. 692 (2004), Court recognized that federal judges usually may not invoke the ATS to create new causes of action, but it also proceeded to speculate that in some future case this Court might invoke the ATS to create a new cause of action.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR, with whom JUSTICE BREYER and JUSTICE KAGAN join, concurring in part and concurring in the judgment.<\/strong><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Bench held that the respondents failed to allege a domestic application of the Alien Tort Statute, hence their complaint must be dismissed.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">The trouble with JUSTICE THOMAS\u2019 test is that it is unmoored from both history and precedent. The ATS was a statute born of necessity.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">One needs to look no further than the text of the ATS to understand the task that the First Congress assigned to the Federal Judiciary. As originally enacted, the ATS gave federal courts \u201ccognizance . . . of all causes where an alien sues for a tort only in violation of the law of nations or a treaty of the United States.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">JUSTICE THOMAS argued that \u201ccreating a cause of action to enforce international law beyond three historical torts invariably gives rise to foreign-policy concerns.\u201d. He offered no meaningful support for that sweeping assertion, nor did he explain why an ATS suit for the tort of piracy, for example, would categorically present fewer foreign-policy concerns than a suit for aiding and abetting child slavery.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">JUSTICE THOMAS suggests that federal courts lack \u201cthe \u2018institutional capacity\u2019 to consider all factors relevant\u201d to recognizing actionable torts under the ATS.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">His pessimism aside, there was no reason to doubt the federal court\u2019s ability to identify those norms of international law that were sufficiently \u201cspecific, universal and obligatory\u201d to give rise to a cause of action under the ATS.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Hence, there is nothing so mysterious about a law\u2019s international origins that would prevent courts\u2014 bodies specifically tasked with, and particularly capable of, interpreting and applying laws\u2014from ably adjudicating a suit for damages arising out of a \u201ctort . . . committed in violation of the law of nations.\u201d<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Since Justice Sotomayor found no support for Justice Thomas\u2019 proposition in the ATS or in the Court\u2019s precedents, he did not join that portion of his opinion.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>JUSTICE ALITO, dissenting.<\/strong><\/p>\n<ul style=\"text-align: justify;\">\n<li><strong>Whether domestic corporation are immune from liability under Alien Tort Statute?<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Justice Alito held that <\/strong>if a particular claim may be brought under the ATS against a natural person who is a US Citizen, a similar claim may be brought against a domestic corporation.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Court disposes of the case holding that respondent\u2019s complaint sought extraterritorial application of the ATS, but in Justice Alito\u2019s view Court should not decide that question at this juncture, it is tied to the question of whether the plaintiffs should be allowed to amend their complaint, and in order to reach the question of extraterritoriality, the Court must assume the answers to a host of important questions.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><em>Part III of JUSTICE THOMAS\u2019s opinion and Part II of JUSTICE GORSUCH\u2019s opinion make strong arguments that federal courts should never recognize new claims under the ATS. But this issue was not raised by petitioners\u2019 counsel, and I would not reach it here.<\/em><\/p>\n<h3><span style=\"color: #ff0000;\">Conclusion<\/span><\/h3>\n<blockquote><p><span style=\"color: #0000ff;\">Supreme Court held that Nestle and Cargill will not be sued for aiding and abetting child slavery at farms in Ivory Coast.<\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">[Nestle USA, Inc. v. Doe, 593 U.S __(2021), decided on 17-06-2021]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS): In 8-1 majority, Thomas, J., announced the judgment of the Court and delivered the opinion <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":8808,"featured_media":32691,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,12],"tags":[30017,46300,46299,41881,46301,46302,46303,29785,42834,31167,30014],"class_list":["post-250130","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-foreigncourts","tag-alien-tort-statute","tag-cargill","tag-child-slavery","tag-child-trafficking","tag-chocolate-company","tag-cocoa","tag-ivory-coast","tag-law","tag-legal-news","tag-nestle","tag-scotus"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO Premium plugin v26.4 (Yoast SEO v26.4) - https:\/\/yoast.com\/wordpress\/plugins\/seo\/ -->\n<title>Whether Nestl\u00e9 and Cargill will be liable for child slavery? SCOTUS decides in 8-1 majority ruling | SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"Child Slavery\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/06\/22\/child-slavery-by-nestle\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Whether Nestl\u00e9 and Cargill will be liable for child slavery? SCOTUS decides in 8-1 majority ruling\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Child Slavery\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/06\/22\/child-slavery-by-nestle\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"SCC Times\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2021-06-22T09:20:34+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2021-06-28T12:29:06+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/01\/supreme_court_of_US.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"1330\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"887\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Bhumika Indulia\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Bhumika Indulia\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"5 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/06\/22\/child-slavery-by-nestle\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/06\/22\/child-slavery-by-nestle\/\",\"name\":\"Whether Nestl\u00e9 and Cargill will be liable for child slavery? SCOTUS decides in 8-1 majority ruling | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/06\/22\/child-slavery-by-nestle\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/06\/22\/child-slavery-by-nestle\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/01\/supreme_court_of_US.jpg\",\"datePublished\":\"2021-06-22T09:20:34+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2021-06-28T12:29:06+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a\"},\"description\":\"Child Slavery\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/06\/22\/child-slavery-by-nestle\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/06\/22\/child-slavery-by-nestle\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/06\/22\/child-slavery-by-nestle\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/01\/supreme_court_of_US.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/01\/supreme_court_of_US.jpg\",\"width\":1330,\"height\":887,\"caption\":\"Supreme Court of The United States\"},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/06\/22\/child-slavery-by-nestle\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Whether Nestl\u00e9 and Cargill will be liable for child slavery? SCOTUS decides in 8-1 majority ruling\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\",\"name\":\"SCC Times\",\"description\":\"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a\",\"name\":\"Bhumika Indulia\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg\",\"caption\":\"Bhumika Indulia\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_1\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Whether Nestl\u00e9 and Cargill will be liable for child slavery? SCOTUS decides in 8-1 majority ruling | SCC Times","description":"Child Slavery","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/06\/22\/child-slavery-by-nestle\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Whether Nestl\u00e9 and Cargill will be liable for child slavery? SCOTUS decides in 8-1 majority ruling","og_description":"Child Slavery","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/06\/22\/child-slavery-by-nestle\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2021-06-22T09:20:34+00:00","article_modified_time":"2021-06-28T12:29:06+00:00","og_image":[{"width":1330,"height":887,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/01\/supreme_court_of_US.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Bhumika Indulia","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Bhumika Indulia","Est. reading time":"5 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/06\/22\/child-slavery-by-nestle\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/06\/22\/child-slavery-by-nestle\/","name":"Whether Nestl\u00e9 and Cargill will be liable for child slavery? SCOTUS decides in 8-1 majority ruling | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/06\/22\/child-slavery-by-nestle\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/06\/22\/child-slavery-by-nestle\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/01\/supreme_court_of_US.jpg","datePublished":"2021-06-22T09:20:34+00:00","dateModified":"2021-06-28T12:29:06+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a"},"description":"Child Slavery","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/06\/22\/child-slavery-by-nestle\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/06\/22\/child-slavery-by-nestle\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/06\/22\/child-slavery-by-nestle\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/01\/supreme_court_of_US.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/01\/supreme_court_of_US.jpg","width":1330,"height":887,"caption":"Supreme Court of The United States"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/06\/22\/child-slavery-by-nestle\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Whether Nestl\u00e9 and Cargill will be liable for child slavery? SCOTUS decides in 8-1 majority ruling"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/","name":"SCC Times","description":"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a","name":"Bhumika Indulia","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg","caption":"Bhumika Indulia"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_1\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/01\/supreme_court_of_US.jpg","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":267419,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/05\/26\/if-a-person-who-is-deaf-and-legally-blind-seeks-physical-therapy-services-is-denied-the-same-can-emotional-distress-damages-be-recovered-scotus-law-legal-news-legal-update\/","url_meta":{"origin":250130,"position":0},"title":"If a person who is deaf and legally blind seeks physical therapy services is denied the same, Can emotional distress damages be recovered? SCOTUS examines","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"May 26, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS): In a 6-3 ruling, Court expressed that, Emotional distress damages are not recoverable in a private action to enforce either the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 or the Affordable Care Act, Roberts C.J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which Thomas, Alito, Gorsuch,\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Supreme Court of The United States","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/01\/supreme_court_of_US.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/01\/supreme_court_of_US.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/01\/supreme_court_of_US.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/01\/supreme_court_of_US.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/01\/supreme_court_of_US.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":233057,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/07\/29\/scotus-denies-permission-to-calvary-chapel-to-hold-service-on-parity-of-terms-allowed-to-casinos-draws-strong-dissent-from-4-judges\/","url_meta":{"origin":250130,"position":1},"title":"SCOTUS denies permission to Calvary Chapel to hold service on parity of terms allowed to casinos; Draws strong dissent from 4 Judges","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"July 29, 2020","format":false,"excerpt":"Supreme\u00a0Court of The United States (SCOTUS):\u00a0In a 5:4 decision, the majority\u00a0 comprising of John G. Roberts Jr., Chief Justice, and Stephen G. Breyer, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Sonia Sotomayor, Elana Kagan, JJ., denied permission to Calvary Chappel, a Nevada church, to hold services on the same terms which were allowed by\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Supreme Court of The United States","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/01\/supreme_court_of_US.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/01\/supreme_court_of_US.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/01\/supreme_court_of_US.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/01\/supreme_court_of_US.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/01\/supreme_court_of_US.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":232883,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/07\/27\/scotus-allows-federal-executions-first-federal-executions-in-17-years-full-story\/","url_meta":{"origin":250130,"position":2},"title":"SCOTUS allows Federal Executions; first federal executions in 17 years [Full Story]","author":"Editor","date":"July 27, 2020","format":false,"excerpt":"Sucheta Sarkar, Editorial Assistant has put this story together","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Supreme Court of The United States","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/01\/supreme_court_of_US.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/01\/supreme_court_of_US.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/01\/supreme_court_of_US.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/01\/supreme_court_of_US.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/01\/supreme_court_of_US.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":264975,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/04\/04\/black-districts\/","url_meta":{"origin":250130,"position":3},"title":"SCOTUS rejects Wisconsin SC endorsed Redistricting Plan increasing the number of majority-Black districts in the Wisconsin State Assembly\u00a0","author":"Editor","date":"April 4, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS): In the instant matter, the SCOTUS deliberated upon a Redistricting Plan prepared by the Governor of Wisconsin for seats in the State\u2019s legislature- the plan which was adopted by Wisconsin Supreme Court and would have increased the number of majority-Black districts in the\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Supreme Court of The United States","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/01\/supreme_court_of_US.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/01\/supreme_court_of_US.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/01\/supreme_court_of_US.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/01\/supreme_court_of_US.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/01\/supreme_court_of_US.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":233301,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/08\/03\/scotus-lower-courts-order-allowing-a-ballot-initiative-to-collect-signatures-electronically-blocked\/","url_meta":{"origin":250130,"position":4},"title":"SCOTUS | Lower Court&#8217;s order allowing a ballot initiative to collect signatures electronically &#8212; Blocked","author":"Editor","date":"August 3, 2020","format":false,"excerpt":"Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS): A majority opinion delivered by Chief Justice Roberts and joined by Alito J, Gorsuch J. and Kavanaugh J. temporarily reversed a lower court order which had extended the deadline for a political action committee to gather signatures for a ballot initiative electronically. The\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Supreme Court of The United States","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/01\/supreme_court_of_US.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/01\/supreme_court_of_US.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/01\/supreme_court_of_US.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/01\/supreme_court_of_US.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/01\/supreme_court_of_US.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":239707,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/11\/27\/even-in-a-pandemic-the-constitution-cannot-be-forgotten-in-a-split-decision-scotus-upholds-first-amendment-guarantee-of-religious-liberty-and-bars-restrictions-on-religious-servic\/","url_meta":{"origin":250130,"position":5},"title":"\u201cEven in a pandemic, the Constitution cannot be forgotten\u201d- In a split decision, SCOTUS upholds First Amendment guarantee of religious liberty and bars restrictions on religious services in New York","author":"Editor","date":"November 27, 2020","format":false,"excerpt":"Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS): While deliberating upon the applications seeking relief from an Executive Order issued by the Governor of New York imposing very severe restrictions on attendance at religious services in areas classified as \u201cRed\u201d or \u201cOrange\u201d Covid-19 zones; the Full Bench of the Court, with\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Supreme Court of The United States","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/01\/supreme_court_of_US.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/01\/supreme_court_of_US.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/01\/supreme_court_of_US.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/01\/supreme_court_of_US.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/01\/supreme_court_of_US.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/250130","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/8808"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=250130"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/250130\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/32691"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=250130"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=250130"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=250130"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}