Supreme Court Backs Push To Remove Ten Commandments Monument

[Windparadox]

`

"WASHINGTON (AP) — The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday sided with a lower court that ordered a New Mexico city to remove a Ten Commandments monument from the lawn outside City Hall. Civil liberties advocates behind the case called the decision involving the city of Bloomfield a victory for the separation of church and state.

ACLU of New Mexico Executive Director Peter Simonson said it sends a “strong message that the government should not be in the business of picking and choosing which sets of religious beliefs enjoy special favor in the community.”However, David Cortman, a senior counsel and vice president of U.S. litigation with Alliance Defending Freedom, said the outcome did nothing to resolve confusion in lower courts involving such monuments.

“Americans shouldn’t be forced to censor religion’s role in history simply to appease someone who is offended by it or who has a political agenda to remove all traces of religion from the public square,” said Cortman, whose group represented the city of Bloomfield".- Source​

`
`
Struggles with monuments. With this one, it;s the age old question of separation of church and state. I agree with with it, but perhaps for different reasons. If a city uses tax payer dollars or publicly owned land, the constitutional question, however arguable, still remains. The courts have continually ruled in favor of the separation clause. The city of Bloomfield's defense of the document, as an American historical document, holds no water.

What's to prevent other cities who may want to erect religious themed monuments representing their particulate faith, such as the Quran, Talmud, Regina Satanas, et al? I say, leave well enough alone. Remove it.
`

 

[Lucy Hamilton]

`

"WASHINGTON (AP) — The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday sided with a lower court that ordered a New Mexico city to remove a Ten Commandments monument from the lawn outside City Hall. Civil liberties advocates behind the case called the decision involving the city of Bloomfield a victory for the separation of church and state.

ACLU of New Mexico Executive Director Peter Simonson said it sends a “strong message that the government should not be in the business of picking and choosing which sets of religious beliefs enjoy special favor in the community.”However, David Cortman, a senior counsel and vice president of U.S. litigation with Alliance Defending Freedom, said the outcome did nothing to resolve confusion in lower courts involving such monuments.

“Americans shouldn’t be forced to censor religion’s role in history simply to appease someone who is offended by it or who has a political agenda to remove all traces of religion from the public square,” said Cortman, whose group represented the city of Bloomfield".- Source​

`
`
Struggles with monuments. With this one, it;s the age old question of separation of church and state. I agree with with it, but perhaps for different reasons. If a city uses tax payer dollars or publicly owned land, the constitutional question, however arguable, still remains. The courts have continually ruled in favor of the separation clause. The city of Bloomfield's defense of the document, as an American historical document, holds no water.

What's to prevent other cities who may want to erect religious themed monuments representing their particulate faith, such as the Quran, Talmud, Regina Satanas, et al? I say, leave well enough alone. Remove it.
`

If the Muslims wanted to construct huge monuments to the Paedophile Prophet and The Qur'an then you Leftists would be fully supporting them and don't say you wouldn't and anyone against it would be called a bigot.

It's just Christianity and Judaism that Leftists fanatically hate.

 

[SobieskiSavedEurope]

Didn't they learn yet that bringing down these monuments just makes more people come out to support them?

 

[Penelope]

`

"WASHINGTON (AP) — The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday sided with a lower court that ordered a New Mexico city to remove a Ten Commandments monument from the lawn outside City Hall. Civil liberties advocates behind the case called the decision involving the city of Bloomfield a victory for the separation of church and state.

ACLU of New Mexico Executive Director Peter Simonson said it sends a “strong message that the government should not be in the business of picking and choosing which sets of religious beliefs enjoy special favor in the community.”However, David Cortman, a senior counsel and vice president of U.S. litigation with Alliance Defending Freedom, said the outcome did nothing to resolve confusion in lower courts involving such monuments.

“Americans shouldn’t be forced to censor religion’s role in history simply to appease someone who is offended by it or who has a political agenda to remove all traces of religion from the public square,” said Cortman, whose group represented the city of Bloomfield".- Source​

`
`
Struggles with monuments. With this one, it;s the age old question of separation of church and state. I agree with with it, but perhaps for different reasons. If a city uses tax payer dollars or publicly owned land, the constitutional question, however arguable, still remains. The courts have continually ruled in favor of the separation clause. The city of Bloomfield's defense of the document, as an American historical document, holds no water.

What's to prevent other cities who may want to erect religious themed monuments representing their particulate faith, such as the Quran, Talmud, Regina Satanas, et al? I say, leave well enough alone. Remove it.
`

If the Muslims wanted to construct huge monuments to the Paedophile Prophet and The Qur'an then you Leftists would be fully supporting them and don't say you wouldn't and anyone against it would be called a bigot.

It's just Christianity and Judaism that Leftists fanatically hate.

They don't, they are a lot like orthodox jews that way, no statues or icons. Jasher chapter 45, Benjamin married at age 10, had 5 boys and married again at age 18 and had another 5 boys, all before he went to Egypt.

 

[Penelope]

The Republican Christian has to bring their bible to congress and say prayers, why is that, they are Christian on the outside, not inside.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Didn't they learn yet that bringing down these monuments just makes more people come out to support them?

That's fine, people can support the monuments, but they should also support the CONSTITUTION.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

`

"WASHINGTON (AP) — The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday sided with a lower court that ordered a New Mexico city to remove a Ten Commandments monument from the lawn outside City Hall. Civil liberties advocates behind the case called the decision involving the city of Bloomfield a victory for the separation of church and state.

ACLU of New Mexico Executive Director Peter Simonson said it sends a “strong message that the government should not be in the business of picking and choosing which sets of religious beliefs enjoy special favor in the community.”However, David Cortman, a senior counsel and vice president of U.S. litigation with Alliance Defending Freedom, said the outcome did nothing to resolve confusion in lower courts involving such monuments.

“Americans shouldn’t be forced to censor religion’s role in history simply to appease someone who is offended by it or who has a political agenda to remove all traces of religion from the public square,” said Cortman, whose group represented the city of Bloomfield".- Source​

`
`
Struggles with monuments. With this one, it;s the age old question of separation of church and state. I agree with with it, but perhaps for different reasons. If a city uses tax payer dollars or publicly owned land, the constitutional question, however arguable, still remains. The courts have continually ruled in favor of the separation clause. The city of Bloomfield's defense of the document, as an American historical document, holds no water.

What's to prevent other cities who may want to erect religious themed monuments representing their particulate faith, such as the Quran, Talmud, Regina Satanas, et al? I say, leave well enough alone. Remove it.
`

What separation clause?

 

[irosie91]

`

"WASHINGTON (AP) — The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday sided with a lower court that ordered a New Mexico city to remove a Ten Commandments monument from the lawn outside City Hall. Civil liberties advocates behind the case called the decision involving the city of Bloomfield a victory for the separation of church and state.

ACLU of New Mexico Executive Director Peter Simonson said it sends a “strong message that the government should not be in the business of picking and choosing which sets of religious beliefs enjoy special favor in the community.”However, David Cortman, a senior counsel and vice president of U.S. litigation with Alliance Defending Freedom, said the outcome did nothing to resolve confusion in lower courts involving such monuments.

“Americans shouldn’t be forced to censor religion’s role in history simply to appease someone who is offended by it or who has a political agenda to remove all traces of religion from the public square,” said Cortman, whose group represented the city of Bloomfield".- Source​

`
`
Struggles with monuments. With this one, it;s the age old question of separation of church and state. I agree with with it, but perhaps for different reasons. If a city uses tax payer dollars or publicly owned land, the constitutional question, however arguable, still remains. The courts have continually ruled in favor of the separation clause. The city of Bloomfield's defense of the document, as an American historical document, holds no water.

What's to prevent other cities who may want to erect religious themed monuments representing their particulate faith, such as the Quran, Talmud, Regina Satanas, et al? I say, leave well enough alone. Remove it.
`

If the Muslims wanted to construct huge monuments to the Paedophile Prophet and The Qur'an then you Leftists would be fully supporting them and don't say you wouldn't and anyone against it would be called a bigot.

It's just Christianity and Judaism that Leftists fanatically hate.

I is mildly surprised Lucy-----you struck me as very secular. ----I do find it kinda weird that there are ANY people who are
"anti ten commandments"---------it is something like wishing ill upon Charlton Heston. -------I have often wondered---WHO IS ANTI --ten commandments ??? Christians like them, Jews like them, muslims like them, I have never met a HINDU who objected to them or their display. WHO IS ANTI-TEN COMMANDMENTS?

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

`

"WASHINGTON (AP) — The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday sided with a lower court that ordered a New Mexico city to remove a Ten Commandments monument from the lawn outside City Hall. Civil liberties advocates behind the case called the decision involving the city of Bloomfield a victory for the separation of church and state.

ACLU of New Mexico Executive Director Peter Simonson said it sends a “strong message that the government should not be in the business of picking and choosing which sets of religious beliefs enjoy special favor in the community.”However, David Cortman, a senior counsel and vice president of U.S. litigation with Alliance Defending Freedom, said the outcome did nothing to resolve confusion in lower courts involving such monuments.

“Americans shouldn’t be forced to censor religion’s role in history simply to appease someone who is offended by it or who has a political agenda to remove all traces of religion from the public square,” said Cortman, whose group represented the city of Bloomfield".- Source​

`
`
Struggles with monuments. With this one, it;s the age old question of separation of church and state. I agree with with it, but perhaps for different reasons. If a city uses tax payer dollars or publicly owned land, the constitutional question, however arguable, still remains. The courts have continually ruled in favor of the separation clause. The city of Bloomfield's defense of the document, as an American historical document, holds no water.

What's to prevent other cities who may want to erect religious themed monuments representing their particulate faith, such as the Quran, Talmud, Regina Satanas, et al? I say, leave well enough alone. Remove it.
`

If the Muslims wanted to construct huge monuments to the Paedophile Prophet and The Qur'an then you Leftists would be fully supporting them and don't say you wouldn't and anyone against it would be called a bigot.

It's just Christianity and Judaism that Leftists fanatically hate.

I is mildly surprised Lucy-----you struck me as very secular. ----I do find it kinda weird that there are ANY people who are
"anti ten commandments"---------it is something like wishing ill upon Charlton Heston. -------I have often wondered---WHO IS ANTI --ten commandments ??? Christians like them, Jews like them, muslims like them, I have never met a HINDU who objected to them or their display. WHO IS ANTI-TEN COMMANDMENTS?

I can tell you who is anti-Ten Commandments: liberals. They see the Ten Commandments as a checklist of sins they must complete every day! Seeing them reminds them that they might have work to do, and you know how libs hate work!

 

[Moonglow]

So religious nutzies need a monument to remind them to be good, yet it isn't helping..

 

[Penelope]

`

"WASHINGTON (AP) — The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday sided with a lower court that ordered a New Mexico city to remove a Ten Commandments monument from the lawn outside City Hall. Civil liberties advocates behind the case called the decision involving the city of Bloomfield a victory for the separation of church and state.

ACLU of New Mexico Executive Director Peter Simonson said it sends a “strong message that the government should not be in the business of picking and choosing which sets of religious beliefs enjoy special favor in the community.”However, David Cortman, a senior counsel and vice president of U.S. litigation with Alliance Defending Freedom, said the outcome did nothing to resolve confusion in lower courts involving such monuments.

“Americans shouldn’t be forced to censor religion’s role in history simply to appease someone who is offended by it or who has a political agenda to remove all traces of religion from the public square,” said Cortman, whose group represented the city of Bloomfield".- Source​

`
`
Struggles with monuments. With this one, it;s the age old question of separation of church and state. I agree with with it, but perhaps for different reasons. If a city uses tax payer dollars or publicly owned land, the constitutional question, however arguable, still remains. The courts have continually ruled in favor of the separation clause. The city of Bloomfield's defense of the document, as an American historical document, holds no water.

What's to prevent other cities who may want to erect religious themed monuments representing their particulate faith, such as the Quran, Talmud, Regina Satanas, et al? I say, leave well enough alone. Remove it.
`

What separation clause?

`

"WASHINGTON (AP) — The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday sided with a lower court that ordered a New Mexico city to remove a Ten Commandments monument from the lawn outside City Hall. Civil liberties advocates behind the case called the decision involving the city of Bloomfield a victory for the separation of church and state.

ACLU of New Mexico Executive Director Peter Simonson said it sends a “strong message that the government should not be in the business of picking and choosing which sets of religious beliefs enjoy special favor in the community.”However, David Cortman, a senior counsel and vice president of U.S. litigation with Alliance Defending Freedom, said the outcome did nothing to resolve confusion in lower courts involving such monuments.

“Americans shouldn’t be forced to censor religion’s role in history simply to appease someone who is offended by it or who has a political agenda to remove all traces of religion from the public square,” said Cortman, whose group represented the city of Bloomfield".- Source​

`
`
Struggles with monuments. With this one, it;s the age old question of separation of church and state. I agree with with it, but perhaps for different reasons. If a city uses tax payer dollars or publicly owned land, the constitutional question, however arguable, still remains. The courts have continually ruled in favor of the separation clause. The city of Bloomfield's defense of the document, as an American historical document, holds no water.

What's to prevent other cities who may want to erect religious themed monuments representing their particulate faith, such as the Quran, Talmud, Regina Satanas, et al? I say, leave well enough alone. Remove it.
`

What separation clause?

`

"WASHINGTON (AP) — The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday sided with a lower court that ordered a New Mexico city to remove a Ten Commandments monument from the lawn outside City Hall. Civil liberties advocates behind the case called the decision involving the city of Bloomfield a victory for the separation of church and state.

ACLU of New Mexico Executive Director Peter Simonson said it sends a “strong message that the government should not be in the business of picking and choosing which sets of religious beliefs enjoy special favor in the community.”However, David Cortman, a senior counsel and vice president of U.S. litigation with Alliance Defending Freedom, said the outcome did nothing to resolve confusion in lower courts involving such monuments.

“Americans shouldn’t be forced to censor religion’s role in history simply to appease someone who is offended by it or who has a political agenda to remove all traces of religion from the public square,” said Cortman, whose group represented the city of Bloomfield".- Source​

`
`
Struggles with monuments. With this one, it;s the age old question of separation of church and state. I agree with with it, but perhaps for different reasons. If a city uses tax payer dollars or publicly owned land, the constitutional question, however arguable, still remains. The courts have continually ruled in favor of the separation clause. The city of Bloomfield's defense of the document, as an American historical document, holds no water.

What's to prevent other cities who may want to erect religious themed monuments representing their particulate faith, such as the Quran, Talmud, Regina Satanas, et al? I say, leave well enough alone. Remove it.
`

If the Muslims wanted to construct huge monuments to the Paedophile Prophet and The Qur'an then you Leftists would be fully supporting them and don't say you wouldn't and anyone against it would be called a bigot.

It's just Christianity and Judaism that Leftists fanatically hate.

I is mildly surprised Lucy-----you struck me as very secular. ----I do find it kinda weird that there are ANY people who are
"anti ten commandments"---------it is something like wishing ill upon Charlton Heston. -------I have often wondered---WHO IS ANTI --ten commandments ??? Christians like them, Jews like them, muslims like them, I have never met a HINDU who objected to them or their display. WHO IS ANTI-TEN COMMANDMENTS?

I can tell you who is anti-Ten Commandments: liberals. They see the Ten Commandments as a checklist of sins they must complete every day! Seeing them reminds them that they might have work to do, and you know how libs hate work!

`

"WASHINGTON (AP) — The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday sided with a lower court that ordered a New Mexico city to remove a Ten Commandments monument from the lawn outside City Hall. Civil liberties advocates behind the case called the decision involving the city of Bloomfield a victory for the separation of church and state.

ACLU of New Mexico Executive Director Peter Simonson said it sends a “strong message that the government should not be in the business of picking and choosing which sets of religious beliefs enjoy special favor in the community.”However, David Cortman, a senior counsel and vice president of U.S. litigation with Alliance Defending Freedom, said the outcome did nothing to resolve confusion in lower courts involving such monuments.

“Americans shouldn’t be forced to censor religion’s role in history simply to appease someone who is offended by it or who has a political agenda to remove all traces of religion from the public square,” said Cortman, whose group represented the city of Bloomfield".- Source​

`
`
Struggles with monuments. With this one, it;s the age old question of separation of church and state. I agree with with it, but perhaps for different reasons. If a city uses tax payer dollars or publicly owned land, the constitutional question, however arguable, still remains. The courts have continually ruled in favor of the separation clause. The city of Bloomfield's defense of the document, as an American historical document, holds no water.

What's to prevent other cities who may want to erect religious themed monuments representing their particulate faith, such as the Quran, Talmud, Regina Satanas, et al? I say, leave well enough alone. Remove it.
`

If the Muslims wanted to construct huge monuments to the Paedophile Prophet and The Qur'an then you Leftists would be fully supporting them and don't say you wouldn't and anyone against it would be called a bigot.

It's just Christianity and Judaism that Leftists fanatically hate.

I is mildly surprised Lucy-----you struck me as very secular. ----I do find it kinda weird that there are ANY people who are
"anti ten commandments"---------it is something like wishing ill upon Charlton Heston. -------I have often wondered---WHO IS ANTI --ten commandments ??? Christians like them, Jews like them, muslims like them, I have never met a HINDU who objected to them or their display. WHO IS ANTI-TEN COMMANDMENTS?

I can tell you who is anti-Ten Commandments: liberals. They see the Ten Commandments as a checklist of sins they must complete every day! Seeing them reminds them that they might have work to do, and you know how libs hate work!

You might want to try the Christian 2 commandments since you want to shove Christianity down every one's throat.

Then one of them, which was a lawyer, asked him a question, tempting him, and saying, Master, which is the great commandment in the law? Jesus said unto him,

Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself. On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.

God is a generic term. Many meanings. PS: I don't like to confuse the jewish laws with the Christian ones.

 

[AvgGuyIA]

ruled in favor of the separation clause

What separation clause? There is no such clause in the Constitution.

 

[Moonglow]

`

"WASHINGTON (AP) — The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday sided with a lower court that ordered a New Mexico city to remove a Ten Commandments monument from the lawn outside City Hall. Civil liberties advocates behind the case called the decision involving the city of Bloomfield a victory for the separation of church and state.

ACLU of New Mexico Executive Director Peter Simonson said it sends a “strong message that the government should not be in the business of picking and choosing which sets of religious beliefs enjoy special favor in the community.”However, David Cortman, a senior counsel and vice president of U.S. litigation with Alliance Defending Freedom, said the outcome did nothing to resolve confusion in lower courts involving such monuments.

“Americans shouldn’t be forced to censor religion’s role in history simply to appease someone who is offended by it or who has a political agenda to remove all traces of religion from the public square,” said Cortman, whose group represented the city of Bloomfield".- Source​

`
`
Struggles with monuments. With this one, it;s the age old question of separation of church and state. I agree with with it, but perhaps for different reasons. If a city uses tax payer dollars or publicly owned land, the constitutional question, however arguable, still remains. The courts have continually ruled in favor of the separation clause. The city of Bloomfield's defense of the document, as an American historical document, holds no water.

What's to prevent other cities who may want to erect religious themed monuments representing their particulate faith, such as the Quran, Talmud, Regina Satanas, et al? I say, leave well enough alone. Remove it.
`

If the Muslims wanted to construct huge monuments to the Paedophile Prophet and The Qur'an then you Leftists would be fully supporting them and don't say you wouldn't and anyone against it would be called a bigot.

It's just Christianity and Judaism that Leftists fanatically hate.

I is mildly surprised Lucy-----you struck me as very secular. ----I do find it kinda weird that there are ANY people who are
"anti ten commandments"---------it is something like wishing ill upon Charlton Heston. -------I have often wondered---WHO IS ANTI --ten commandments ??? Christians like them, Jews like them, muslims like them, I have never met a HINDU who objected to them or their display. WHO IS ANTI-TEN COMMANDMENTS?

She saw the bandwagon slowly proceeding down USMB avenue and decided to jump on to place vile rhetoric upon the pages of this thread..

 

[Penelope]

ruled in favor of the separation clause

What separation clause? There is no such clause in the Constitution.

The first amendment is ok as long as one is Christian. Go to church not to city hall.

 

[Penelope]

another thing, if you want the 10 commandments in gov places,

please remember the bible punishments for not obeying them. Thank you. Most of you would end up being stoned.

 

[Windparadox]

ruled in favor of the separation clause

What separation clause? There is no such clause in the Constitution.

`
Duh.

"Separation of church and state" is paraphrased from Thomas Jefferson and used by others in expressing an understanding of the intent and function of the Establishment Clause and Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States which reads: "Congress shall make no law respecting an ..." - Source

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

ruled in favor of the separation clause

What separation clause? There is no such clause in the Constitution.

`
Duh.

"Separation of church and state" is paraphrased from Thomas Jefferson and used by others in expressing an understanding of the intent and function of the Establishment Clause and Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States which reads: "Congress shall make no law respecting an ..." - Source

No, duh! That is a complete fabrication. The fact you cited it does not mean anything except you cited a fabrication.

Notice is says nothing about a "separation clause".

 

[MindWars]

Already posted this LAST WEEK

Didn't they learn yet that bringing down these monuments just makes more people come out to support them?

That's fine, people can support the monuments, but they should also support the CONSTITUTION.

The Constitution should stop being used as a weapon that only benefits the psychotic leftist nut-jobs. Any other time you leftist pricks claim the CONSTITUTION IS OLD AND OUT DATED suddenly it seems to still have a function.

 

[MindWars]

`

"WASHINGTON (AP) — The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday sided with a lower court that ordered a New Mexico city to remove a Ten Commandments monument from the lawn outside City Hall. Civil liberties advocates behind the case called the decision involving the city of Bloomfield a victory for the separation of church and state.

ACLU of New Mexico Executive Director Peter Simonson said it sends a “strong message that the government should not be in the business of picking and choosing which sets of religious beliefs enjoy special favor in the community.”However, David Cortman, a senior counsel and vice president of U.S. litigation with Alliance Defending Freedom, said the outcome did nothing to resolve confusion in lower courts involving such monuments.

“Americans shouldn’t be forced to censor religion’s role in history simply to appease someone who is offended by it or who has a political agenda to remove all traces of religion from the public square,” said Cortman, whose group represented the city of Bloomfield".- Source​

`
`
Struggles with monuments. With this one, it;s the age old question of separation of church and state. I agree with with it, but perhaps for different reasons. If a city uses tax payer dollars or publicly owned land, the constitutional question, however arguable, still remains. The courts have continually ruled in favor of the separation clause. The city of Bloomfield's defense of the document, as an American historical document, holds no water.

What's to prevent other cities who may want to erect religious themed monuments representing their particulate faith, such as the Quran, Talmud, Regina Satanas, et al? I say, leave well enough alone. Remove it.
`

LIVE WIRE LMFAO and by the way I Posted this last week already LIKE WED.

 

[BlackSand]

`

"WASHINGTON (AP) — The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday sided with a lower court that ordered a New Mexico city to remove a Ten Commandments monument from the lawn outside City Hall. Civil liberties advocates behind the case called the decision involving the city of Bloomfield a victory for the separation of church and state.

ACLU of New Mexico Executive Director Peter Simonson said it sends a “strong message that the government should not be in the business of picking and choosing which sets of religious beliefs enjoy special favor in the community.”However, David Cortman, a senior counsel and vice president of U.S. litigation with Alliance Defending Freedom, said the outcome did nothing to resolve confusion in lower courts involving such monuments.

“Americans shouldn’t be forced to censor religion’s role in history simply to appease someone who is offended by it or who has a political agenda to remove all traces of religion from the public square,” said Cortman, whose group represented the city of Bloomfield".- Source​

`
`
Struggles with monuments. With this one, it;s the age old question of separation of church and state. I agree with with it, but perhaps for different reasons. If a city uses tax payer dollars or publicly owned land, the constitutional question, however arguable, still remains. The courts have continually ruled in favor of the separation clause. The city of Bloomfield's defense of the document, as an American historical document, holds no water.

What's to prevent other cities who may want to erect religious themed monuments representing their particulate faith, such as the Quran, Talmud, Regina Satanas, et al? I say, leave well enough alone. Remove it.
`

The article (or a least the portion you posted) ... Doesn't present an accurate portrayal of what actually happened involving The Supreme Court of the United States.

SCOTUS didn't side with either side ... They refused to hear the case ... And in a traditional manner, gave no reason as to why they came to that decision.
The court nor justices comment on cases they don't consider ... And they can return or uphold previous verdicts for any number of reasons (legal or procedural).

It would be a better idea wait until SCOTUS actually hears a case and makes a ruling ... Before anyone (ACLU) starts suggesting they won anything.

.