Religious freedom gets a boost in Supreme Court ruling....

[2aguy]

Yep...... 7-2

Supreme Court Rules in Favor of Trinity Lutheran Church in Case with Religious Freedom Implications

Chief Justice Roberts explains in his opinion that “the Free Exercise Clause ‘protect religious observers against unequal treatment’ and subjects to the strictest scrutiny laws that target the religious for ‘special disabilities” based on their ‘religious status.’”

“Applying that basic principle,” he writes, “this Court has repeatedly confirmed that denying a generally available benefit solely on account of religious identity imposes a penalty on the free exercise of religion that can be justified only by a state interest ‘of the highest order.’”

Roberts acknowledges that the consequence of the state’s decision is “in all likelihood, a few extra scraped knees,” but concludes “the exclusion of Trinity Lutheran from a public benefit for which it is otherwise qualified, solely because it is a church, is odious to our Constitution all the same, and cannot stand.”

Roberts specified, however, in a footnote, that “this case involves express discrimination based on religious identity with respect to playground resurfacing. We do not address religious uses of funding or other forms of discrimination.”

Justice Neil Gorsuch, joining Roberts’ opinion in part, wrote that “Missouri’s law bars Trinity Lutheran from participating in a public benefits program only because it is a church. I agree this violates the First Amendment and I am pleased to join nearly all of the Court’s opinion.”

 

[EvilCat Breath]

Who was the dissent? Kagan and Sotomayor come to mind.

 

[BlindBoo]

A pre-school run by a church is still a pre-school and should have qualified for the funds to improve the safety for the Missouri children to begin with.

 

[grainbely]

Yay Religious freedom!



(except muslims)

Sent from my SM-G930V using USMessageBoard.com mobile app

 

[grainbely]

Yep...... 7-2

Supreme Court Rules in Favor of Trinity Lutheran Church in Case with Religious Freedom Implications

Chief Justice Roberts explains in his opinion that “the Free Exercise Clause ‘protect religious observers against unequal treatment’ and subjects to the strictest scrutiny laws that target the religious for ‘special disabilities” based on their ‘religious status.’”

“Applying that basic principle,” he writes, “this Court has repeatedly confirmed that denying a generally available benefit solely on account of religious identity imposes a penalty on the free exercise of religion that can be justified only by a state interest ‘of the highest order.’”

Roberts acknowledges that the consequence of the state’s decision is “in all likelihood, a few extra scraped knees,” but concludes “the exclusion of Trinity Lutheran from a public benefit for which it is otherwise qualified, solely because it is a church, is odious to our Constitution all the same, and cannot stand.”

Roberts specified, however, in a footnote, that “this case involves express discrimination based on religious identity with respect to playground resurfacing. We do not address religious uses of funding or other forms of discrimination.”

Justice Neil Gorsuch, joining Roberts’ opinion in part, wrote that “Missouri’s law bars Trinity Lutheran from participating in a public benefits program only because it is a church. I agree this violates the First Amendment and I am pleased to join nearly all of the Court’s opinion.”

A new era for the religious welfare state. They dont pay taxes yet get public benefits.

Is your head exploding?

I'll wait.