9-0 Supreme court decision supports religious freedom......a good day for freedom in America....

[2aguy]

9-0 is a pretty good decision in the Supreme Court....and considering this decision upholds the Right of an American to refuse to work on Sundays due to his religious beliefs is a good thing....

the unanimous ruling in Groff v USPS a “victory for religious liberty,” quoting Gerald Groff’s attorneys at First Liberty:

In a decision issued Thursday, the Supreme Court ruled unanimously in favor of the Pennsylvania postal worker who lost his job for refusing to take Sunday delivery shifts due to his observance of the Sabbath.
The court’s opinion, written by justice Samuel Alito, held that accommodating Gerald Groff’s religious observances did not provide an “undue burden” on postal operations, which expanded to Sundays for Amazon delivery.
“An employer who fails to provide an accommodation has a defense only if the hardship is ‘undue,’ and a hardship that is attributable to employee animosity to a particular religion, to religion in general, or to the very notion of accommodating religious practice cannot be considered ‘undue,’” the court stated. “Faced with an accommodation request like Groff’s, it would not be enough for an employer to conclude that forcing other employees to work overtime would constitute an undue hardship.”

So Groff can take Sundays off now? Er … not quite. Today’s unanimous decision does not resolve the case, at least not for now. It corrects a lower-court interpretation of Title VII and an earlier precedent (Hardison) about the nature and definition of “undue hardship.” Alito’s ruling makes clear that an undue hardship would have to be substantial rather than “de minimis,” but it does not resolve whether Groff’s demand for accommodation meets the threshold by which the USPS can deny it.


Alito’s conclusion makes it clear that the court has to rehear the dispute with the correct definition and standard in mind for the “undue hardship” test:

Did a unanimous SCOTUS deliver a victory for religious expression today?

hotair.com

 

[rightwinger]

Slippery slope on what someone who claims to be religious can demand of an employer

 

[Polishprince]

I guess none of the liberals on the court are 7th Day Adventists who would have argued that the Sabbath was Saturday and not Sunday, so Mr. Groff's religious objections weren't justified? After all, libs base their decisions on what they think is the best policy, not the Constitution.

 

[shockedcanadian]

God Bless America!

 

[norwegen]

Well, whaddya know. Christianity may be on a rebound now.

 

[tyroneweaver]

The other soldiers at my permanent duty station told me that my sargeant really liked me cuz I never complained about my duty schedule

I mean if I had sunday off I went to church. If I didn't, I didn't go.

 

[Tommy Tainant]

In the free UK people can opt out of working sunday without having to justify it. It needs extending for other faiths.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

9-0 is a pretty good decision in the Supreme Court....and considering this decision upholds the Right of an American to refuse to work on Sundays due to his religious beliefs is a good thing....

the unanimous ruling in Groff v USPS a “victory for religious liberty,” quoting Gerald Groff’s attorneys at First Liberty:


So Groff can take Sundays off now? Er … not quite. Today’s unanimous decision does not resolve the case, at least not for now. It corrects a lower-court interpretation of Title VII and an earlier precedent (Hardison) about the nature and definition of “undue hardship.” Alito’s ruling makes clear that an undue hardship would have to be substantial rather than “de minimis,” but it does not resolve whether Groff’s demand for accommodation meets the threshold by which the USPS can deny it.


Alito’s conclusion makes it clear that the court has to rehear the dispute with the correct definition and standard in mind for the “undue hardship” test:

Did a unanimous SCOTUS deliver a victory for religious expression today?

hotair.com

So now a nurse can become a 7th Day Adventist and never have to work another Saturday!

 

[bodecea]

Slippery slope on what someone who claims to be religious can demand of an employer

They can make anything up now.

 

[excalibur]

Well, whaddya know. Christianity may be on a rebound now.

It was what the religion clause was meant to protect, the various Christian sects.

Sadly, it is now applied to demonism and Wiccanism, etc.

 

[johnwk]

9-0 is a pretty good decision in the Supreme Court....and considering this decision upholds the Right of an American to refuse to work on Sundays due to his religious beliefs is a good thing....

Maybe a good decision if it only applies to a federal worker working for the United States Postal Service

If it is made to apply to a private sector business and their employees, it's not a good decision.

JWK

Our Authoritarian Revolutionaries detest people being left free to mutually agree in their contracts and associations, and likewise detests a free market, free enterprise system.

 

[norwegen]

It was what the religion clause was meant to protect, the various Christian sects.

Sadly, it is now applied to demonism and Wiccanism, etc.

When the Constitution was drafted, religion was synonymous with Christianity. Allowances for Judaism, of course.

 

[bodecea]

It was what the religion clause was meant to protect, the various Christian sects.

Sadly, it is now applied to demonism and Wiccanism, etc.

All religions....even the made up ones (almost all of them)

 

[excalibur]

When the Constitution was drafted, religion was synonymous with Christianity. Allowances for Judaism, of course.

As John Adams said, the Constitution was for a moral people. Paganism is not moral.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

When the Constitution was drafted, religion was synonymous with Christianity.

When the Constitution was drafted, a firearm was synonymous with a musket.

 

[norwegen]

When the Constitution was drafted, a firearm was synonymous with a musket.

So get yourself a musket.

 

[excalibur]

When the Constitution was drafted, a firearm was synonymous with a musket.

And? Free speech was akin to a printing press.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

So get yourself a musket.

I would rather have a modern firearm, and I am allowed because we do not base our rights on what was synonymous with something 250 plus years ago.

The same holds true for religion.

 

[norwegen]

I would rather have a modern firearm, and I am allowed because we do not base our rights on what was synonymous with something 250 plus years ago.

The same holds true for religion.

So get yourself a modern firearm, then, and bugger off.

You do know that the framers were aware that firearms would evolve, right. The Constitution even makes provisions for patents.

 

[candycorn]

I would rather have a modern firearm, and I am allowed because we do not base our rights on what was synonymous with something 250 plus years ago.

The same holds true for religion.

I'm not sure what the most devastating finishing move in mixed martial arts is but you just delivered it.