Filter by
Search
Search Keywords
- ADF attorneys file motion to intervene in federal court on behalf of ProtectMarriage.com to defend Calif. marriage amendment
- District court will decide on whether to affirm ministry’s right to use its property in manner consistent with its beliefs
- ADF attorneys represent ProtectMarriage.com
- ADF attorneys filed motion to intervene in federal court on behalf of ProtectMarriage.com
- ADF attorneys represented taxpayers
- Photo artist told by civil rights commission to pay over $6,600 in attorneys’ fees for declining to photograph same-sex ceremony
- The following quote may be attributed to Alliance Defending Freedom Legal Counsel Jim Campbell regarding a determination by the director of the New Jersey Division on Civil Rights that a Christian ministry engaged in “wrongdoing” for abiding by its faith: “The government should not be able to force a Christian organization to use its property in a way that would violate its own religious beliefs. Both the U.S. and New Jersey constitutions protect the freedom of faith-based groups to use their property in a manner consistent with those beliefs. That freedom trumps any state law that conflicts ...
- Legal team defending California marriage amendment files final brief with U.S. Supreme Court
- The following quote may be attributed to Alliance Defending Freedom Senior Counsel Austin R. Nimocks regarding the decision of the U.S. Supreme Court Wednesday to strike down the federal Defense of Marriage Act in United States v. Windsor: “The Supreme Court got it wrong in saying that a state that has redefined marriage can force that definition on the federal government. The federal government should be able to define what marriage is for federal law just as states need to be able to define what marriage is for state law. Americans should be able to continue advancing the truth about ...
- The following quote may be attributed to Alliance Defending Freedom Senior Counsel Austin R. Nimocks regarding the California Supreme Court’s decision Wednesday in Hollingsworth v. O’Connell to deny the petition to uphold the state’s voter-approved marriage amendment: “Elected officials should enforce the law. Though the current California officials are unwilling to enforce the state constitution, we remain hopeful that one day Californians will elect officials who will. It is unfortunate that the California Supreme Court chose not to decide the important, still-unresolved questions about the ...