Supreme Court

Your Ringside Seat to Constitutional History in the Making

April 22, 2021 by developer

You can have a ringside seat to Constitutional history on Monday morning, April 26, at 10 a.m. Eastern. That’s when the U.S. Supreme Court will hear the Thomas More Law Center’s (TMLC) challenge to California’s demand that nonprofits disclose the names of their major donors if they want to solicit donations in the state.

You will be able to hear the audio of this historic argument by clicking on the CSPAN link below:

Listen to our SCOTUS hearing here

As you know, TMLC is your strong voice on issues like religious freedom, the sanctity of human life, traditional marriage and family values, and illegal immigration. We fight against the intimidating and malicious actions of the “cancel culture” agents, which chill the right to free speech and association so fundamental to our democratic society.

John Bursch, the vice president of appellate advocacy and senior counsel of Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF) is representing TMLC. The Supreme Court ordered that TMLC’s case be consolidated for oral argument with a similar case filed by Americans For Prosperity Foundation (AFPF).

TMLC’s court battle began in 2015 when the California Attorney General (now Vice President Kamala Harris) demanded that we disclose information to her office on all our major donors within 30 days or she would deny our license to solicit donations in her state. Her threatened action violated fundamental constitutional rights to free speech and freedom of association, and so we filed the federal lawsuit which will now be decided by the Supreme Court.

Everybody should be free to peacefully support causes they believe in without fear of harassment or intimidation. Unfortunately, that is not the case in California. California has threatened that freedom by demanding the Thomas More Law Center—and every other non-profit which has supporters in California—turn over their donors’ private information. California then tracks that information and has been leaking it like a sieve.

Granted, we are often engaged in controversial issues. But you have the right to donate to organizations that advance your beliefs with the assurance your privacy will be protected. That’s why TMLC relentlessly pursued this case for over 5 years.

It is about your First Amendment right of free speech and freedom of association. The Thomas More Law Center has fought long and hard to protect these rights. And your privacy.

I can’t thank you enough for your past support. Once again, I am asking you to make a financial sacrifice.

Pray for our success; pray for our Nation.

Know that we are always Battle Ready to Defend Your Freedoms.

With warmest regards,

Richard Thompson, Esq.

President and Chief Counsel

Thomas More Law Center

The Thomas More Law Center defends and promotes America’s Judeo-Christian heritage and moral values. It supports a strong national defense and an independent and sovereign United States of America. The Law Center accomplishes its mission through litigation, education, and related activities. It does not charge for its services. The Law Center is supported by contributions from individuals, corporations and foundations, and is recognized by the IRS as a section 501(c)(3) organization. You may reach the Thomas More Law Center at (734) 827-2001 or visit our website at www.thomasmore.org.

Watch this Video to Learn Why You are the Reason the U.S. Supreme Court Will Hear Thomas More Law Center’s Case Next Month

March 10, 2021 by developer

Click here to watch the video

Watch this short video by clicking here to learn why You are the reason the U.S. Supreme Court will hear Thomas More Law Center’s (“TMLC”) monumental case on free speech and freedom of association this April. The video was produced by the Alliance Defending Freedom (“ADF”) whose attorneys are representing TMLC in the appeal.

TMLC is your strong voice on core political issues including religious freedom, the sanctity of human life, traditional marriage and family values, and illegal immigration. We fight against the intimidating and malicious actions of the “cancel culture” agents, which undermine the right to freedom of speech and association so fundamental to our democratic society.

Understandably, these are controversial issues. But you have the right to donate to organizations that advance your beliefs with the assurance your privacy will be protected. That’s why we filed this lawsuit.

And this is the reason that ever since its founding 22 years ago, TMLC has never disclosed the names of its donors. But when Vice President Kamala Harris was still California’s attorney general, in 2012 and every year during her tenure, she demanded TMLC turn over the names of all our major donors because we receive donations from California residents. The Law Center refused. Then we challenged her in court.

We defended our donor’s privacy through a 3-day bench trial held before Federal District Judge Manuel Real. Auditors and investigators from Harris’ office testified that they have never had a complaint filed against TMLC; they have never investigated TMLC, and they don’t use major donation reports to start investigations. Yet, they claimed that they needed our private donor information.

Thankfully, Judge Real ruled to protect donor privacy, recognizing that TMLC should not be required to violate the trust and desires of its donors by revealing private information to state government officials.

Judge Real permanently stopped Kamala Harris from requiring TMLC to provide copies of its major donor list.

But the case did not end there. California appealed to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals and the Ninth Circuit agreed with California, effectively undoing Judge Real’s good decision. So TMLC brought this case to the US Supreme Court. And the Supreme Court has agreed to hear TMLC’s case. Oral arguments are expected in late April.

John Bursch, a former Michigan solicitor general, is representing the Thomas More Law Center on behalf of Alliance Defending Freedom. Read the Detroit News article concerning an interview of Mr. Bursch, regarding our case by clicking here.

The importance of this case is demonstrated by the numerous friend of the court briefs with more than 40 briefs filed in TMLC’s support representing a spectrum of political interests, conservative and liberal, faith-based and secular.

This is about your First Amendment right of free speech and freedom of association. The Thomas More Law Center has fought long and hard to protect these rights.

For the last 22 years, I have held our donor list in the strictest of confidence and I am proud to say we have never shared any information about our donors with anyone.

That’s because you are the reason we exist.

I can’t thank you enough for your past support. Once again, I am asking you to make a financial sacrifice. The survival of America as a constitutional republic grounded on Judeo-Christian values is in your hands.

Know that we are always Battle Ready to Defend Your Freedoms.

God bless you. God bless America.

Richard Thompson, Esq.

President and Chief Counsel

Thomas More Law Center

Thomas More Law Center Files Supreme Court Brief Defending The 40-Foot Bladensburg Peace Cross Erected Nearly A Century Ago

December 27, 2018 by TMLC

December 27, 2018

ANN ARBOR, MI – The Thomas More Law Center (“TMLC”), a national public interest law firm based in Ann Arbor, Michigan, on December 19, 2018, filed an amicus brief in the U.S. Supreme Court, in support of the forty-foot Bladensburg Peace Cross, erected nearly a century ago. The Cross was erected by the American Legion and the grieving mothers of the forty-nine soldiers from Prince George County, Maryland, who were killed in World War I, in commemoration of their service to the Nation.

(Algerina Perna /The Baltimore Sun via AP, File)

Nevertheless, the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the Cross must be removed or destroyed as a result of a federal lawsuit brought by three atheists who occasionally drove past the cross and claimed they were offended. Agreeing with the atheists, the Court held that the Cross violated the Establishment Clause of the U.S. Constitution. The Court found that the cross is the “preeminent symbol of Christianity,” and that while the cross may generally serve as a symbol of death and memorialization, it only holds that value because of its affiliation with the crucifixion of Jesus Christ.

However, TMLC’s brief pointed out:

“Allowing a historic war memorial to be destroyed to quell some momentary discomfort plaintiffs feel when they drive past the Bladensburg monument would do real and lasting harm to this country; it would send a message of disrespect to our fallen soldiers and their families, and it would deprive future generations of a treasured piece of history.”

In 1920, a mother of one of the men honored by the monument, wrote in a letter to a US senator, “…the chief reason I feel so deeply in the matter my son, Wm. F. Redman lost his life in France and because of that, I feel that our memorial cross is in a way his grave stone.”

TMLC’s brief agreed:

“[T]he Bladensburg Memorial should be treated with a sense of reverence and respect that acknowledges its commemorative purpose. Much like an actual gravestone, the Bladensburg Memorial provides a visible record of the heroic deaths of the men whose names are etched into it. Preserving the memory of these men and their sacrifice was crucial to the generation that knew them.”

The Bladensburg Peace Cross stands on land at a busy intersection in Maryland and sits on a rectangular base which includes the words “Valor,” “Endurance,” “Courage,” and “Devotion.”

The Cross also contains a bronze plaque stating, “This Memorial Cross Dedicated to the Heroes of Prince George’s County, Maryland Who Lost Their Lives in the Great War for the Liberty of the World.” The plaque also includes the names of the forty-nine soldiers memorialized by the monument and a poignant quote from President Woodrow Wilson: “The right is more precious than the peace. We shall fight for the things we have always carried nearest our hearts. To such a task we dedicate our lives.”

Clearly, the use of the Cross reflected the custom in Europe during World War I where the cross became the principal grave marker in cemeteries where soldiers were buried as described in the opening lines “In Flanders Fields,” a famous poem of the time whose opening line begins “In Flanders fields the poppies blow, between the crosses, row on row.”

TMLC claims that the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals decision ordering the removal or destruction of the Bladensburg Cross simply because it is a religious symbol of Christianity, shows a hostility toward religion, particularly Christianity, not intended by the Constitution, and puts at risk hundreds of memorials with similar symbols including those at Arlington National Cemetery where crosses of comparable size commemorate America’s fallen soldiers.

According to TMLC’s brief:

“We cannot change the stories of the dead to appease the all too easily offended living. Any harm respondents feel they incur due to seeing the shape of a cross when they happen to drive past the Bladensburg memorial, pales in comparison to the real and lasting harm that destroying such memorials will cause to this country as a whole, to veterans’ families, and to the memories of the men and women who are honored by them.”

TMLC writes, that in this case, the primary purpose of the Latin cross is to honor the dead using a historical symbol of death and sacrifice. The decision to destroy this memorial, simply because the plaintiffs claim to be offended by the memorial’s Latin cross, evidences an intolerance to Christianity that is wholly inconsistent with our nation’s history and with the purpose and meaning of the First Amendment’s Establishment Clause.

TMLC seeks to preserve the Bladensburg memorial to respect the decision of the bereaved parents, who nearly a century ago chose to honor their deceased children with the monument as it currently stands.

Click here to read TMLC’s entire brief.

The Day After Hobby Lobby Decision, Supreme Court Rules For Another Corporation Challenging the HHS Mandate

July 2, 2014 by TMLC

The day after its ruling in Hobby Lobby, the US Supreme Court granted review of the Thomas More Law Center’s petition on behalf of Eden Foods and its president Michael Potter, vacated the judgment, and remanded the case back to the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals for further consideration in light of the Hobby Lobby decision.

Click Here for Supreme Court Order

The Thomas More Law Center (TMLC), a national public interest law firm based in Ann Arbor, MI, filed Eden Food’s initial challenge to the HHS Mandate in March 2013. After being denied a temporary injunction preventing enforcement of the HHS Mandate by a federal district court and the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals, TMLC filed a petition for review with the Supreme Court. That petition had been held in abeyance pending the decision in the Hobby Lobby case.

Eden Foods, co-founded by Potter in the late 1960s, is the oldest natural food company in North America and the largest independent manufacturer of dry grocery organic foods. In 2009, Eden Foods was selected as the best food company in the world by Better World Shopping Guide, which also acknowledged the company’s outstanding record in social and environmental responsibility. The company employs 150 employees.

For years, Michael Potter, a Roman Catholic, President and sole shareholder of Eden Foods Corporation, for religious reasons, had arranged for the Blue Cross/Blue Shield insurance coverage he designed for his employees to specifically exclude coverage for contraception and abortifacients. In accordance with his Catholic faith, Potter believes that any action which either before, at the moment of, or after sexual intercourse, is specifically intended to prevent procreation, whether as an end or means”—including abortifacients and contraception—is wrong.

The HHS Mandate forced Potter to make a choice between violating a foremost tenet of his faith or face fines up to $4.5 million per year.

Potter brought the lawsuit because he cannot compartmentalize his faith and his business practices.

Mr. Potter said in a statement, “We are grateful for the Hobby Lobby decision and look forward to further developments.”

Erin Mersino, TMLC’s Senior Trial Counsel who is handling the Eden Foods case commented on yesterday’s Supreme Court order, “The Supreme Court’s ruling in Hobby Lobby preserves the religious freedom we are guaranteed under the Constitution. The HHS mandate required business owners to directly violate their faith. The Supreme Court relied upon the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA), which was signed into law by President Clinton and passed in a bipartisan effort to protect our First Amendment rights, to strike down the mandate. Under RFRA, the government has to establish a basis for substantially burdening one’s religious faith. Here, the government failed to do so.”

Mersino continued, “Justice Ginsburg’s dissent and proposed parade of horribles has no basis in reality. No flood gates have been opened. The truth is that the Supreme Court struck down an unjust law.”