That was ACLU v Mercer in the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals. And yes the ACLU lost - big time. In addition, in its decision the Court derided and insulted the ACLU probably as much as legally ethical (unlike that Moonbat in Mich). It was a major smackdown. Anyway here is the salient part of the decision.
The ACLU’s argument contains three fundamental flaws. First, the ACLU makes repeated reference to “the separation of church and state.” This extra-constitutional construct has grown tiresome. The First Amendment does not demand a wall of separation between church and state.IMO this was s a HUGH victory for the good guys. The problem was that this decision came down right before Christmas on Dec 20, 2005. And at that time 'we' were all caught up in the 'War on Christmas', so this got little attention.
ACLU v Mercer County, Ky (NOTE its PDF)
And excuse the interruption :-)
Thanks for the reminder - I'd forgotten the name of the case - and I agree it was a HUGE smackdown for the ACLU. Is the 6th Circuit the one which will hear the appeal of that Michigan moonbat judge's decision on the NSA terrorist wiretapping case?
There is no debate about the so-called constitutional principal of absolute c&s separation. After all, Jefferson, Mr. "wall of separation" himself, made it clear that the states uniquely have the power to address religious issues.
What has happened is that anti-religious expression special interest groups long ago failed to wrap Congress around their fingers with respect to making laws that reflected their selfish concerns. So selfish interest groups bypassed Congress by getting their members appointed as Supreme Court justices. Special interest factions were then able force their anti-religious expression ideas into the laws that Congress makes, Congress be damned.
The reason that Supreme Court anti-religious expression shenanigans have been going on for so long is that the people are ignorant of both their Constitution and how their government works.
http://tinyurl.com/npt6t
http://tinyurl.com/hehr8
Anti-religious expression judges who don't take their oaths to defend the Constitution seriously are taking advantage of widespread constitutional ignorance by walking all over our religious freedoms.
As I have stated elsewhere, the people need to get a grip on what the honest interpretations of the 1st, 10th and 14th Amendments actually say about their religious freedoms. Then, when the people wise up to the fact that they are essentially prisoners of conscious to the bogus interpretation of the establishment clause by a renegade, anti-religious expression Supreme Court, they will hopefully heed Lincoln's advice for dealing with crooked judges:
"We the People are the rightful master of both congress and the courts - not to overthrow the Constitution, but to overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution." --Abraham Lincoln, Political debates between Lincoln and Douglas, 1858.