Posted on 06/04/2018 9:31:01 AM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum
Wouldn’t it be nice if we had a Supreme Court that actively upheld our Constitution without concentrating on making it a money-tree for lawyers?
But then they are lawyers first.
It also lets the baker, who is probably near bankruptcy by now, spend even more money on his continued defense.
Is 7-2 decisive?
Because the constitution protects religious liberty not the ability to be offended.
While the issue presented to the court was narrow, the decision itself was not.
Certainly 7-2 is decisive but the questions and arguments will be "decisive of what?"
How they gonna stop him from selecting a SCOTUS Nominee?
Even in the last year we can pull the:
“This is a re-election of the president election, not a new president election, so he has the right to select his nominee and have it voted on.”
It would drive the Liberals even more crazy, which would be an added bonus.
That's possible. But the Court was also limited to ruling on the laws in place at the time. Things have changed since 2012.
Vote-wise, it was wide.
Legally, it was narrow in that it did not address the core issue: does the baker have to decorate a cake (it's not the cake or the customers at issue, but the design, don't forget) in a way which goes against his religious beliefs?
Sending it back to a commission which has already demonstrated its antagonism for Christians would seem narrow, as in narrow-minded. But that's just me.
IMHO It puts pressure on these fascistic state commissions to give respect and deference to religion and religious belief in their decision making procedures.
Excellent signal
“The justices, in a 7-2 decision, said the Colorado Civil Rights Commission showed an impermissible hostility toward religion”
http://news.trust.org/item/20180604150452-eu3tg
IOW a self-cancelling SC decision written on special paper that auto ignites and burns up as you read it.
But if it were 5-4 against baker it would be earth shattering?
Bingo. And forcing them to recognize that free exercise does apply in these cases is a stake through their heart. All of the acts of "hostility" of the commission which were noted by the court were made in response to the baker's free exercise arguments. The commission was quite hostile in trying to shut down these arguments because they know if free exercise is a right that must be considered then the baker wins. The Court ruled that free exercise is a right which applies and must be addressed.
Absolutely, definite win.....and with 7 votes!
Religious belief got a major boost today, MAJOR!
It could take decades to restore the once-honored right of the seller of goods or services to choose who he or she wants to sell to. "Public accommodation" laws have all but destroyed that natural right, implicit in the right to one's own property.
Exactly. It is on a timeline of “we’ll revisit this as soon as a few million more of those Deplorables move on to that great Tea Party in the sky”.
If every voter over 40 dropped dead tomorrow Leftism would steamroll to total victory.
The problem comes the moment you decide that the 5000 year old understanding of the meaning of “marriage” can be overturned by any human lawmaker.
It comes once you’ve abandoned natural law as your basis for civil law. Any law that violates natural law is not law. People used to know that.
It would drive the Liberals even more crazy, which would be an added bonus.
True, and good thinking.
She wasn’t qualified to begin eith.
How about this ... a Christian baker gets an order for a normal wedding cake, walks over to a Muslim baker to subcontract that out, video records his transaction of successfully ordering the cake at THAT baker ... and THEN, the next time he gets an order for a GAY wedding cake, he goes through the SAME exercise, naturally gets denied service from the Muslim baker, notifies his customer he cannot do the cake because the baker he uses to subcontract some orders turned him down, and then IF he gets sued for denying service to his GAY customer, he countersues the Muslim bakery for denying his order for a GAY wedding cake.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.