On November 4, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Fulton v. Philadelphia. The Court is being asked to consider whether foster and adoption agencies that oppose same-sex marriage on religious grounds may be exempted from serving such couples. Given the Court's rulings over the past decade that have sought to protect religious freedom, many legal scholars expect a similar outcome in this case. 

Professor Robin Fretwell Wilson spoke to Religion News Service about the case, and also wrote an extensive blog post for legal blog Balkinization, which is excerpted below:

"Just as the religious liberty protections in state same-sex marriage laws (353-356) were commonsensical accommodations of plural interests, we have the ability to make everyone well. There’s no reason for agencies to close. There’s no reason for couples to be turned away. A lot of these “zero-sum” outcomes flow from an antiquated funding system that has favored large monopolists and created a dearth of smaller providers. Anytime you have a limited number of providers, you have choke points, so mission one must be to grow the number of providers, as explained below.

"Missing in the sterile claims made in Fulton about who has been wronged—the  state (its “managerial authority”) or the agency—is what it means for children when prospective parents are turned away.  Reading the briefs, one would think a disappointed couple simply flips to the next agency in their rolodex."

Read the full article at religionnews.com.

Read the full blog post at balkin.blogspot.com.