Rawls on the "Hard Question" for LGBTQ Rights in Fulton v. City of Philadelphia Are Religious Exemptions Just?

Abstract

In his dissent in Obergefell v. Hodges, Chief Justice John Roberts warned of a “hard question” concerning the tension between LGBTQ equality and religious liberty. In 2018, Fulton v. City of Philadelphia posed this question: Are religious exemptions just? I apply John Rawls’ theory of justice to determine if exemptions are just in a constitutional democracy when applied to LGBTQ people. First, I argue exemptions create an inequality for LGBTQ people based on Rawls’ first principle of justice, which asserts equal entitlement to basic liberties. Second, I analyze if this inequality can be justified under the second principle, which considers equal opportunity and the impact on society’s worst-off. I conclude exemptions fail to meet Rawls’ criteria and are unjust.