Justice Kagan

Justice Kagan says, let's assume for the purpose of this that you're wrong about the merits, that the government is not allowed to do this under the Constitution. And yet it seems to me that your argument says we get to keep on doing it until everyone who is potentially harmed by it figures out how to file a lawsuit, hire a lawyer, et cetera.

Justice Kagan says, let's assume for the purpose of this that you're wrong about the merits, that the government is not allowed to do this under the Constitution. And yet it seems to me that your argument says we get to keep on doing it until everyone who is potentially harmed by it figures out how to file a lawsuit, hire a lawyer, et cetera.

And I don't understand how that is remotely consistent with the rule of law.

And I don't understand how that is remotely consistent with the rule of law.

You resisted Justice Kagan when she asked you whether the government would obey within the Second Circuit a precedent. I'm distinguishing between opinions and judgments here. Did I understand you correctly to tell Justice Kagan that the government wanted to reserve its right to maybe not follow a Second Circuit precedent, say, in New York because you might disagree with the opinion?

You resisted Justice Kagan when she asked you whether the government would obey within the Second Circuit a precedent. I'm distinguishing between opinions and judgments here. Did I understand you correctly to tell Justice Kagan that the government wanted to reserve its right to maybe not follow a Second Circuit precedent, say, in New York because you might disagree with the opinion?

This administration's practice or the longstanding practice of the federal government? And I'm not talking about in the Fourth Circuit, are you going to respect a Second Circuit? I'm talking about within the Second Circuit. And can you say, is that this administration's practice or a longstanding one?

This administration's practice or the longstanding practice of the federal government? And I'm not talking about in the Fourth Circuit, are you going to respect a Second Circuit? I'm talking about within the Second Circuit. And can you say, is that this administration's practice or a longstanding one?

You resisted Justice Kagan when she asked you whether the government would obey within the Second Circuit a precedent. I'm distinguishing between opinions and judgments here. Did I understand you correctly to tell Justice Kagan that the government wanted to reserve its right to maybe not follow a Second Circuit precedent, say, in New York because you might disagree with the opinion?

This administration's practice or the longstanding practice of the federal government? And I'm not talking about in the Fourth Circuit, are you going to respect a Second Circuit? I'm talking about within the Second Circuit. And can you say, is that this administration's practice or a longstanding one?

We think there are lines that can be drawn. They're the same lines that this court has drawn in every other free exercise case. And the burden a plaintiff has to show that its beliefs are religious, that they are sincere, there has to be a substantial infringement or burden or pressure.

We think there are lines that can be drawn. They're the same lines that this court has drawn in every other free exercise case. And the burden a plaintiff has to show that its beliefs are religious, that they are sincere, there has to be a substantial infringement or burden or pressure.

And that's the rule that schools everywhere in the country are working under right now.

And that's the rule that schools everywhere in the country are working under right now.

We think there are lines that can be drawn. They're the same lines that this court has drawn in every other free exercise case. And the burden a plaintiff has to show that its beliefs are religious, that they are sincere, there has to be a substantial infringement or burden or pressure.

And that's the rule that schools everywhere in the country are working under right now.