Sepper is a scholar of religious liberty, health law and discrimination. She has written extensively on the interactions between religion and reproductive and end-of-life healthcare. She also is one of the nation’s foremost experts in the antidiscrimination obligations of public accommodations—that is, businesses, social service providers and organizations open to the public.
While this week’s U.S. Supreme Court decision siding 7-2 with bakery owner Jack Phillips in Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission was “far from explosive,” it still sends important signals on how such cases will be handled in the future, said a legal scholar at Washington University in St. Louis.
The First Amendment does not give Masterpiece Cakeshop and its owner, Jack Phillips, the license to discriminate against gay couples, as businesses open to the general public have a longstanding obligation to provide full and equal service to customers, argues a legal scholar at Washington University in St. Louis.
Should physicians be required to disclose their religious beliefs to patients? How should we think about institutional conscience in the health care setting? How should health care providers deal with families with religious objections to withdrawing treatment? These questions and more are tackled in a new book co-edited by an expert on health law at Washington University in St. Louis.
While courts around the United States have found President Trump’s travel ban on Muslim-majority nations unconstitutional, the courts may have overlooked an important point, says an expert on law and religion at Washington University in St. Louis.
A three-judge panel of the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has heard arguments on Mississippi HB 1523, which allows people with certain religious beliefs to refuse goods and services to LGBTQ and unmarried people. The bill is a textbook example of an unconstitutional law, says a law and religion scholar at Washington University in St. Louis.