Posted on 06/30/2014 11:23:41 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
In a strong dissent on the so-called Hobby Lobby case Monday morning, Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg sharply disagreed with the deciding justices in language so harsh Justice Anthony Kennedy felt the need to respond in his own concurring opinion.
“In a decision of startling breadth, the Court holds that commercial enterprises, including corporations, along with partnerships and sole proprietorships, can opt out of any law (saving only tax laws) they judge incompatible with their sincerely held religious beliefs,” Ginsburg wrote.
“In the Court’s view, RFRA demands accommodation of a for-profit corporation’s religious beliefs no matter the impact that accommodation may have on third parties who do not share the corporation owners’ religious faith—in these cases, thousands of women employed by Hobby Lobby and Conestoga or dependents of persons those corporations employ.”
Ginsburg excoriated the majority justices for ignoring the intent of the the Religious Freedom Restoration Act and extending its protections, for the first time, to for-profit entities, which she saw as existentially distinct to the point of rendering their owners’ potential religious beliefs irrelevant to their practice of business.
“The distinction between a community made up of believers in the same religion and one embracing persons of diverse beliefs, clear as it is, constantly escapes the Court’s attention,” she wrote. “One can only wonder why the Court shuts this key difference from sight.”
Kennedy, whose opinion was largely concerned with limiting the scope of the decision, disagreed with Ginsburg’s assessment of the majority’s ruling. He argued “that the Court’s opinion does not have the breadth and sweep ascribed to it by the respectful and powerful dissent,” and maintained that the Court disagreed over the interpretation of the RFRA, but not its intent.
It’s snake-mean and turkey-stupid, round these parts.
True of turkeys, but snakes just want to eat a rodent. What’s mean about that?
Judge: "Mr. Snake, guilty as charged, but this court will not detain you. You've already done your community service."
I bet her breath is pretty startling.
1,000 Year old halitosis breath
Very commendable.
“Where on earth did this idea come from, that you can’t get something unless someone else pays for it?”
What I want to know is where the idea came from that I am on the other side of this argument.
I didn’t think you were. I was just expounding at you.
Oh, OK. All good, then.
Instead of a “No ... instead ...” to your post, I was going for “Yes ... and not only that!”
Ginsberg is the radical.
I should have understood that. Sorry.
Senility gallops on.
Eh, no problem.
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.