|Community >> View Post|
Subj: Another precedent bites the dust...
Posted: Mon Jun 27, 2022 at 02:33:30 pm EDT (Viewed 187 times)
Reply Subj: The Supreme Court
Posted: Sun Jun 26, 2022 at 01:44:49 pm EDT (Viewed 266 times)
In the Kennedy case the court seems to ignore the facts of the case and upholds the right of a school employee to pray with students on the 50 yard game after the game, ignoring any coercion this may cause.
This overrules the Lemon run case, where government actions cannot support or impede religion. So, in an official capacity a public employee cannot push a religion while acting in official capacity. The court also ignored another precedent from the early 90's that codified Lemon, in Lee. I am a little less clear if that is overruled too.
The deference towards religion and contempt of the facts by the conservative majority is striking.
This and the Maine ruling in addition to deference to churches when states put neutral COVID restrictions down should be very troubling to everyone.
In some ways this ruling may be the least of these, but it still would have been deemed unconsitutional by all courts using the afore mentioned standards.
But this court is not bound by any precedent.
The Lemon rule guided cases determining if the Establishment cause was violated. In its place "references to historical practices and understandings".
This historical understanding approach is one of the biggest jokes I have ever heard. It is not even originalism or textualism anymore. It is cherry picking from history and finding reasons to toss out the parts that do not agree with ideology.
Not to mention how are lower court judges supposed to make this analysis in the first place? Judges are not historians. SCOTUS pulls most of its history with its staff but is still often wrong on things or are too selective.
It is a joke of a standard that has popped up over and over again in recent rulings that seems to make light of things they disagree with based in history and ignorance of it and the circumstances around history. Even going by an originalist perspective the Fouders were very skeptical of church and state overlapping and tried to separate it whenever possible. This court seeks to toss away everything from then to now to appease Christians, but will likely look for ways to exclude other religions and those that are athiestic, agnostic or other types of belief or lack of belief.
Look Raist bunnies...
Posted with Google Chrome 103.0.5060.53 on Windows 10
|On Topic™ © 2003-2023 Powermad Software|