Overturning Religious Precedent

In this episode of Advisory Opinions, hosts Sarah Isger and David French explore a range of constitutional and institutional issues, beginning with the Supreme Court's grant of certiorari in a Colorado religious liberty case involving Catholic preschools seeking an exemption from the state’s non-discrimination requirements in its Universal Preschool Program. The discussion centers on whether Colorado’s policy—allowing exemptions for schools serving specific demographics like LGBTQ families or low-income children while denying one to Catholic schools—undermines the neutrality of its non-discrimination rule, potentially rendering Employment Division v. Smith inapplicable. The hosts debate whether this case could finally challenge the precedent of Smith, which limits religious exemptions unless the law is not neutral or generally applicable. They also examine the Fezzik Principle, a concept from Jesse Wegman suggesting the Court should care about public popularity to maintain legitimacy, arguing instead that the Court’s independence and institutional integrity matter more than polling. The conversation then turns to the professionalization of the Court, with a provocative suggestion that Senator Ted Cruz could be a valuable addition due to his legislative experience, though the hosts remain skeptical. Finally, they address practical advice for aspiring law students, recommending rigorous majors like math or philosophy, and reflect on the broader media and institutional bubbles that shape public perception of the Court. The episode closes with audience questions on ethics, the shadow docket, AI accountability, and the long-term legacy of decisions like Dobbs.