Published September 21, 2026 at 6:33 AM ET · Updated September 22, 2026 at 12:15 AM ET
Judge blocks state requirement tied to assisted suicide for Catholic nuns
2 independent outlets are covering this story, first reported here by The Western Journal. Verification: Corroborated (how we verify). Every headline links to the original reporting.
A judge blocked a state measure that would have required Catholic nuns to participate in assisted suicide. Coverage indicates the legal dispute is not over.
Patriot Watch first flagged this story 10 d ago, when The Western Journal reported it. Coverage has since grown to 2 independent outlets. The most recent report came 9 d ago from The Gateway Pundit.
⚖ The Constitutional Angle
Employment Division v. Smith lets neutral, generally applicable laws burden religion. Church of the Lukumi Babalu Aye v. City of Hialeah and Fulton v. City of Philadelphia held that measures targeting religious practice or allowing discretionary exemptions must meet strict scrutiny. The nuns' challenge turns on that divide: a mandate singling out religious objectors invites strict scrutiny and likely fails.
Employment Division v. Smith 494 U.S. 872 (1990)
Vote: 6-3
SHORT CROSS-REFERENCE ENTRY (fuller free-exercise treatment lives in the religion-schools topic via Kennedy v. Bremerton). The free-exercise baseline: the Free Exercise Clause does not relieve an individual of the obligation to comply with a 'valid and neutral law of general applicability' — here, Oregon's criminal peyote prohibition — even when the law incidentally burdens religious practice; no compelling-interest balancing is required for such laws. Congress responded with RFRA (1993), which restores strict scrutiny against the federal government only.
Church of the Lukumi Babalu Aye v. City of Hialeah 508 U.S. 520 (1993)
Vote: 9-0 (unanimous as to the judgment; the Kennedy opinion was joined in full or in part by…
The neutrality exception to Smith: Hialeah's ordinances outlawing ritual animal sacrifice were neither neutral nor generally applicable — they gerrymandered around secular killing (slaughterhouses, hunting, pest control) to suppress Santeria worship — so they trigger strict scrutiny, which they fail. A law targeting religious practice, even if facially neutral, must be justified by a compelling interest and be narrowly tailored.
Fulton v. City of Philadelphia 593 U.S. 522 (2021)
Vote: 9-0 (unanimous judgment; opinion of the Court for six)
Philadelphia's refusal to contract with Catholic Social Services for foster-care services unless CSS agreed to certify same-sex couples violates the Free Exercise Clause. Because Section 3.21 of the city's contract allowed exemptions at the Commissioner's 'sole discretion,' the policy was not generally applicable — 'a law is not generally applicable if it invites the government to consider the particular reasons for a person's conduct by providing a mechanism for individualized exemptions' — so Smith did not apply, strict scrutiny governed, and the city's interests could not survive it.
Precedent facts from the PW Law Library — primary-source verified & independently audited
