What’s at stake in the high-profile religious liberty case at the Supreme Court this term? Amanda Tyler and Holly Hollman break down the oral arguments in Fulton v. Philadelphia, which centers on whether a religious organization can apply its religious criteria to discriminate when operating as a government contractor delivering foster care services. They share four takeaways and speculate about what sort of decision we might see in the case. Plus, they take a look at how religion has been discussed in terms of voting this week, including problematic implications of a religious test for office.     Segment one: What are the religious liberty issues at play in Fulton v. Philadelphia? (starting at 1:05) For more on Employment Division v. Smith (1990) and the legislative response, visit BJConline.org/RFRA Holly mentioned this story in the Washington Post by Michelle Boorstein: Religious conservatives hopeful new Supreme Court majority will redefine religious liberty precedents BJC has a page dedicated to the Fulton v. Philadelphia case: BJConline.org/Fulton Read BJC’s brief in the Fulton case at this link.   Segment two:  Four takeaways from the oral arguments (starting at 19:32) You can listen to the oral arguments in Fulton v. Philadelphia via CSPAN at this link.   We played three clips from the arguments: Justice Sonia Sotomayor speaking with Lori Windham, the advocate for Fulton (around 16:25 into the argument) Neal Katyal, the advocate for Philadelphia, talking about how Fulton’s position can lead to religions being against each other (around 1:18:04 into the argument) Justice Samuel Alito expressing outrage at government actors trying to impose their beliefs on religious actors (around 1:04:17 into the argument) Learn more about the Masterpiece Cakeshop case on our website: BJConline.org/Masterpiece   Segment three: Religion and the election (starting at 44:56) For more on the “no religious test” principle, read this article from Amanda Tyler, written in advance of the Amy Coney Barrett hearings.