More Options

Show Print-Only Articles

Nicholas Little

Nicholas Little's photo

Nick Little is the Legal Director of the Center for Inquiry, based out of Washington, D.C. After his education at Oxford University and the University of Warwick in the U.K., Nick moved to the United States and received a law degree from Vanderbilt University. He joined the firm of Howrey, LLP and litigated national and international antitrust matters, as well as a series of pro bono engagements. Nick successfully represented an apostate from the Middle East, who faced deportation to and execution in his native Sudan for the crime of converting away from Islam, winning him asylum in the United States. He also worked with mentally ill New Yorkers to ensure adequate provision of state resources enabling patients to leave institutions and safely and productively live in the community; represented hearing disabled citizens in their efforts to ensure local hospitals provided sign language interpreters as required by the Americans With Disabilities Act; and represented individuals in complaints of malpractice against the D.C. Metropolitan Police. When his firm closed, Nick moved to the non-profit sector and accepted a position with CFI. Aside from internal legal work for CFI, Nick has filed amicus briefs in the Hobby Lobby Supreme Court case and the Seventh Circuit challenge to unfair tax breaks given to housing allowances paid to religious ministers. Nick is always seeking cases in which CFI can involve itself, either as an amicus in an existing matter, or directly representing a plaintiff.

Homeopathy is a Sham

Special Report
August 1, 2017
Homeopathy is a Sham

Homeopathy is a sham. Homeopathic “remedies” have been shown repeatedly by scientific research to be at best placebos.

Trump’s Muslim Ban and His Battle to Undermine the Judiciary

Free Thinking (centerforinquiry.net)
January 31, 2017
Trump’s Muslim Ban and His Battle to Undermine the Judiciary

Just as Sean Spicer, Trump’s Press Secretary, and others have sought to delegitimize the Fourth Estate, and paint the press as the enemy, so the current deliberate battle with the courts is seeking to undermine public support for the judicial branch.

The Question Christians Must Now Ask Themselves

Free Thinking (centerforinquiry.net)
November 9, 2016
The Question Christians Must Now Ask Themselves

Christian groups will get much that they want from the upcoming regime; their coffers will be protected from taxation, they will receive taxpayer funds to proselytize, their business-owning members will likely be permitted to refuse service to LGBT people. Yet at what cost?

Repealing the Burkini Ban Doesn’t Address the Real Problem

Free Thinking (centerforinquiry.net)
August 26, 2016
Repealing the Burkini Ban Doesn’t Address the Real Problem

The ban and the way it was enforced were wrong. But while our commitment to religious freedom and free speech and expression requires us to support the right of women to dress as they wish, whether that be in “revealing” or “modest” attire, or anything in between, whether for purely personal or religious reasons, in the significant majority of cases, religious dress codes for women are not voluntarily adopted by their wearers.

“Yesterday’s Home Runs Don’t Win Today’s Games”

Free Thinking (centerforinquiry.net)
July 14, 2016
“Yesterday’s Home Runs Don’t Win Today’s Games”

We’ve had recent victories in culture war battles, in particular regarding LGBT rights. With Lawrence v. TexasUnited States v. Windsor, and Obergefell v. Hodges, we have moved from a situation only thirteen years ago where states could imprison people for being gay, to one where marriage equality is the law throughout the fifty states. But it would be a terrible mistake to think either that the fight is done, or even that we have the upper hand in the battle.

The Problem of Hell

Free Thinking (centerforinquiry.net)
June 13, 2016
The Problem of Hell

Hell was, I was taught, an unspeakably bad place. A place of torture, torment, and pain that would last for all eternity. And so I became unable to hold the existence of such a place, where people were actually sent, as consistent with the idea of a loving God.

SCOTUS and the Terrible, Horrible, No Good, Very Bad Non-Decision

Free Thinking (centerforinquiry.net)
May 18, 2016
SCOTUS and the Terrible, Horrible, No Good, Very Bad Non-Decision

On Monday the decision came down in Zubik v. Burwell, the latest incarnation of the campaign by the Religious Right against the Affordable Care Act and in particular its Contraceptive Mandate. Or, more correctly, the non-decision came down…

What if 1940s Britain Had RFRA (and Justice Alito)?

Free Thinking (centerforinquiry.net)
May 11, 2016
What if 1940s Britain Had RFRA (and Justice Alito)?

Walking to the Metro last week, I heard a sound I don’t normally hear in my neighborhood, especially during the week – church bells. I have always loved the sound of church bells. Well, except for the college years when they magnified hangovers, but I am getting distracted. Church bells bring back floods of memories of my childhood in rural Sussex. So, of course, the sound took me away to fits of reminiscing and dreaming. 

Ultra-Orthodox Airlines: Why Did SHE Have to Move?

Free Thinking (centerforinquiry.net)
April 5, 2016
Ultra-Orthodox Airlines: Why Did SHE Have to Move?

This scene is being played out repeatedly at multiple airports, and on multiple airlines. Men complain based on religious beliefs, and women are forced to move. When men are denied this “accommodation” they have protested, stood in the aisles, and refused to allow the plane to take off. So the airlines have kowtowed to their demands, and the men have gotten their way. The offending and offensive woman has been taken elsewhere in the plane, where, presumably, she should be grateful that she can sit without having curtains drawn around her.

What’s Really at Stake in Zubik: “They Want to Prevent Contraception”

Free Thinking (centerforinquiry.net)
March 24, 2016
What’s Really at Stake in Zubik: “They Want to Prevent Contraception”

It’s 2016. The year which holds the 47th anniversaries not only of my birth, but also of humanity’s first tentative steps onto soil not of this planet with the first lunar landing. And yesterday, on a beautiful spring day in DC, I spent the morning on the steps of the Supreme Court protesting in favor of access to birth control as the justices heard oral arguments in the case of Zubik v. Burwell.

 

Crying “Religious Freedom,” but Bearing False Witness

Free Thinking (centerforinquiry.net)
November 23, 2015
Crying “Religious Freedom,” but Bearing False Witness

The Ninth Commandment states “Thou shalt not bear false witness” (Exodus 20:16). Perhaps this is a passage of the Bible which the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty needs to reread and take to heart. In its self-serving publicity blurb on our court case down in Florida, the Becket Fund tells an outright lie. 

Why Blaine Amendments Must Be Defended

Free Thinking (centerforinquiry.net)
July 10, 2015
Why Blaine Amendments Must Be Defended

It’s been almost two weeks since the Supreme Court decided the Obergefell case, and extended marriage equality across the nation. In that two weeks, there has been remarkably little smiting of America by a vengeful God. Either he is busy with other things, or he wasn’t overly upset by the decision after all.

Indiana and the Legal Landscape for LGBT Rights

Free Thinking (centerforinquiry.net)
April 8, 2015

It appears that Indiana has realized that discriminatory laws are unpopular with the business community, and is backpedalling post-haste to clarify that, despite its ongoing fight against same sex marriage rights, the rhetoric of the law’s sponsors, and the invitation of a series of anti-gay bigots to the signing ceremony, the state’s Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) was never intended to allow for discrimination against the gay community.

 

Tradition Can’t be a Reason to Discriminate: Our Brief to the Supreme Court on Same-Sex Marriage

Free Thinking (centerforinquiry.net)
March 6, 2015

Yesterday the Center for Inquiry filed a brief with the Supreme Court arguing that the Court should reverse the decision of the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals which ruled that there was no right under the United States Constitution for gay and lesbian individuals to marry in Michigan, Ohio, Tennessee and Kentucky. In order to prevent the Court being swamped with briefs, lawyers for the couples seeking the right to marry requested that groups file joint briefs. To facilitate this, the Center for Inquiry joined with the American Humanist Association to submit their arguments.

 

Are Roy Moore’s Actions Illegal as Well as Immoral?

Free Thinking (centerforinquiry.net)
February 11, 2015
Are Roy Moore’s Actions Illegal as Well as Immoral?

Judge Roy Moore, Chief Justice of the Alabama Supreme Court, on Sunday ordered Alabama state judges   not to issue licenses to same sex couples in
that state. Moore did not simply express disapproval for the federal ruling that mandates marriage equality in Alabama.

A Win for Secularism as Kentucky Rejects Tax Breaks for Fundamentalist Theme Park

Free Thinking (centerforinquiry.net)
December 11, 2014
A Win for Secularism as Kentucky Rejects Tax Breaks for Fundamentalist Theme Park

After investigations and a letter writing campaign by multiple secular organizations, including the Center For Inquiry, the Commonwealth of Kentucky has withdrawn its offer of around $18 million in state tax incentives to the Ark Encounter Theme Park.

 

Utah, Guns, and Free Speech

Free Thinking (centerforinquiry.net)
October 17, 2014
Utah, Guns, and Free Speech

Anita Sarkeesian, a feminist writer most known for her analysis of sexism in video games, was meant to give a lecture on Wednesday, October 15th, at Utah State University. I say “meant to” because Sarkeesian cancelled her lecture, fearing for her safety. 

Hobby Lobby – Where Alito (and the Administration) Went Wrong

Free Thinking (centerforinquiry.net)
July 1, 2014
Hobby Lobby – Where Alito (and the Administration) Went Wrong

In some ways, you have to hand it to Justice Alito. It is uncommon for a Supreme Court Justice to get every single question in a case wrong, but that is exactly what the newest member of the Court’s conservative majority managed with the contraception mandate cases.

Page 1 of 1 pages