What in the hell happened to all of the inferior courts for the past three years?
Was the 9-0 decision sincere conviction or were the liberal justices just sending a message to the senate?
Hmmm, Enquiring Minds, Want To Know.
Posted on 06/17/2021 9:25:33 AM PDT by Marchmain
Catholic League president Bill Donohue comments on today’s ruling by the Supreme Court on a seminal religious liberty case:
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled today that Catholic foster care agencies can reject gay couples from adopting children. This is a huge victory for religious liberty and a resounding defeat for LGBTQ activists.
It was these activists who launched a contrived assault on the rights of Catholic social service agencies—no gay or transgender couple had ever complained that they were discriminated against by these Catholic entities—and now their effort to impose their secular beliefs on Catholics has been rejected.
Chief Justice John Roberts, writing for the six members who joined his majority opinion (others offered their own opinions), noted that the Catholic agency named in the lawsuit only sought “an accommodation that will allow it to continue serving the children of Philadelphia in a manner consistent with its religious beliefs; it does not seek to impose those beliefs on anyone else (my italics).”
The First Amendment guarantees religious liberty, and that provision means little if it only means the right to worship. The right to freely exercise one’s religious beliefs in the public square is central to religious liberty, and while that right—like all other constitutional rights—is not absolute, it must be seen as presumptively constitutional.
(Excerpt) Read more at catholicleague.org ...
I’m surprised even kagan and sotomayor agreed with this.
Thank God. A decisive victory.
Looking good for Jack Phillips (Christian cake artist).
I say cake artist because he is not just a baker. He he happy to sell a baked cake to a transgender activist and it would probably be delicious. He’s just not willing to design and implement cakes promoting transgenderism.
If Ruth Buzzie was still alive I doubt she would vote with this ruling. It’s a rare bird when the black robes make a constitutionally correct unanimous decision.
Excellent. Bravo!
This is a trap. With the liberals joining it has to be. Has this verdict narrowed religious liberty to a new standard?
I certainly understand your skepticism and you may be right ... but let’s celebrate this victory for religious freedom ... even if only for a day. Cheers!
About time.
What I’ve been saying right along...do what you want...just don’t tell me I have to participate or condone your lifestyle.
The Gay Mafia had a major slap down.
Too bad nothing will change until they get sued into oblivion.
This was a very narrow opinion and applies only in this specific contract. Seems the contracts allowed for discretion toward secular agencies, but mandated religious organizations. Donahue is taking liberty in his interpretation of the decision.
I think this goes back to earlier posts that the Supreme Court judges are reminding the Democrats who has the power. They do not want more judges on the court, it dilutes their individual power.
And a 9-0 judgement makes it very hard for lower courts to find a loophole in an appeal.
What in the hell happened to all of the inferior courts for the past three years?
Was the 9-0 decision sincere conviction or were the liberal justices just sending a message to the senate?
Hmmm, Enquiring Minds, Want To Know.
The three liberals Kagan, Sotomyer, and Breyer stand with religious freedom, outstanding.
If that’s really Hillary on the cover she looks at least 90 years old.
I feel like this is a compromise in return for protecting Obamacare.
There’s been a number of 7-2 rulings where Kagan and Breyer were in the majority. Sotomayor and Ginsburg were the dissenters in cases.
Alito’s concurrence is more on point than the stupid headline above.
“This decision might as well be written on the dissolving
paper sold in magic shops. The City has been adamant
about pressuring CSS to give in, and if the City wants to
get around today’s decision, it can simply eliminate the
never-used exemption power.21 If it does that, then, voilà,
today’s decision will vanish—and the parties will be back
where they started. The City will claim that it is protected
by Smith; CSS will argue that Smith should be overruled;the lower courts, bound by Smith, will reject that argument;
and CSS will file a new petition in this Court challenging
Smith. What is the point of going around in this circle?”
“and while that right—like all other constitutional rights—is not absolute...”
Yeah. He should have written constitutionally protected rights.
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.