Alito holds that the parents in this case are likely to succeed in their challenge to the school board’s policies foreclosing the opt-out option.
The court first holds that the parents are likely to succeed on their claim that the policy of not allowing opt-outs unconstitutionally burdens their exercise of their religion.
Sotomayor: The reverberations of the Court’s error will be felt, I fear,for generations. Unable to condone that grave misjudg-ment, I dissent.
Good news for parents. This should have been a no-brainer.
Which of course is why Sotomayor, Kagan and Jackson dissented. They have no brains.
The court first holds that the parents are likely to succeed on their claim that the policy of not allowing opt-outs unconstitutionally burdens their exercise of their religion.
“We have long recognized,” Alito writes, “the rights of parents to direct ‘the religious upbringing’ of their children. And we have held that those rights are violated by government policies that substantially interfere with the religious development of children.”
How could anyone dissent in this case?