Yet Another: SCOTUS Smacks Left on Prayer

[Weatherman2020]

WASHINGTON, June 28, 2018 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- In a surprise action today, the U.S. Supreme Court summarily reversed a lower court ruling in the case Sause v. Bauer, in which attorneys for First Liberty Institute and Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP, represent Mary Anne Sause.

“The Supreme Court’s decision today is a just outcome for Ms. Sause and a victory for religious liberty,” said Kelly Shackelford, President and CEO of First Liberty. “No American citizen should ever be ordered by government officials not to pray in their own home.”

U.S. Supreme Court Reverses Lower Court in Prayer Case

I wish this weeks News had dragged out a few weeks, I’m missing out drinking a lot of leftist tears.

 

[mikegriffith1]

And notice that this was a summary judgment. That's the Supreme Court equivalent of a beat-down.

Incredibly, Breyer dissented (but without providing an opinion).

 

[Vastator]

This has been a historically crushing week for the left. Someone should make a “week in review” thread of all the leftist defeats. It’d be a humdinger. And the weeks not over yet...

 

[SassyIrishLass]

Earlier this week SCOTUS gave faith based anti abortion pregnancy centers a win in California


Supreme Court Sides With California Anti-Abortion Pregnancy Centers

 

[MisterBeale]

Hmmmm. . . . I wonder if this would have gone the same way if they had not been Christian?

 

[SassyIrishLass]

It's obvious the left underestimated freedom of religion rights

 

[Montrovant]

A decision that police officers should not have immunity is smacking the left on prayer?

 

[OKTexas]

WASHINGTON, June 28, 2018 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- In a surprise action today, the U.S. Supreme Court summarily reversed a lower court ruling in the case Sause v. Bauer, in which attorneys for First Liberty Institute and Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP, represent Mary Anne Sause.

“The Supreme Court’s decision today is a just outcome for Ms. Sause and a victory for religious liberty,” said Kelly Shackelford, President and CEO of First Liberty. “No American citizen should ever be ordered by government officials not to pray in their own home.”

U.S. Supreme Court Reverses Lower Court in Prayer Case

I wish this weeks News had dragged out a few weeks, I’m missing out drinking a lot of leftist tears.

All it means is the lady can now pursue a civil rights violation against the officers.


.

 

[Wacky Quacky]

What does that story have to do with the left? The story was about a police officer who ordered someone to stop praying during a investigation inside their home.

Are you anti-cop or something?

 

[Syriusly]

WASHINGTON, June 28, 2018 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- In a surprise action today, the U.S. Supreme Court summarily reversed a lower court ruling in the case Sause v. Bauer, in which attorneys for First Liberty Institute and Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP, represent Mary Anne Sause.

“The Supreme Court’s decision today is a just outcome for Ms. Sause and a victory for religious liberty,” said Kelly Shackelford, President and CEO of First Liberty. “No American citizen should ever be ordered by government officials not to pray in their own home.”

U.S. Supreme Court Reverses Lower Court in Prayer Case

I wish this weeks News had dragged out a few weeks, I’m missing out drinking a lot of leftist tears.

What 'leftists' are crying about this?

on behalf of a Kansas woman who alleged that police officers violated her civil rights when they tried to stop her from praying in her own apartment, can go forward. The justices emphasized that the lower courts should have interpreted her pleadings more generously because she had acted as her own lawyer in early proceedings in the case.

Mary Anne Sause’s case arose back in 2013, when two Kansas police officers went to her home in response to a noise complaint. At first Sause refused to let the officers into her apartment; when she eventually did admit them, they told her that she was going to jail. That announcement prompted Sause (with one officer’s permission) to kneel and begin to pray. The other officer told her to stop, and she received two tickets for her failure to answer the door.




Acting without a lawyer, Sause filed a federal civil rights lawsuit against the officers, claiming that they had violated her First Amendment rights when they forced her to stop praying. The police officers asked the lower court to dismiss the case, arguing that they were entitled to qualified immunity. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit ruled for the officers. Even if they did violate Sause’s rights, the court reasoned, the officers still could not be sued because there is no case in which a court ruled that a scenario like this one violated the First Amendment.


Backed not only by the state of Texas but also by a group of former federal prosecutors, Sause asked the Supreme Court to overturn the 10th Circuit’s decision without briefing or oral argument. She told the justices that the 10th Circuit had granted the officers qualified immunity “solely because the officers’ alleged conduct was so egregiously unconstitutional” that there are no similar cases. But, she argued, the court has not required identical cases for a lawsuit to go forward; what matters is whether the officers had “fair warning” that their actions were unconstitutional – which the officers here did, she said.

Allyson Ho, Jim Ho’s wife, took over as counsel of record in the case after moving to Gibson Dunn, Jim Ho’s former law firm. After considering the case at their private conferences 15 times in a row, today the justices sent the case back to the lower court. Although Sause had argued on appeal only that the police officers had violated her First Amendment right to freely exercise her religion, the court observed, she had originally argued also that the officers violated her Fourth Amendment to be free of unreasonable searches and seizures. And in this case, the court continued, the two issues are “inextricable”: Although the right to pray is “unquestionably” protected by the First Amendment, police may in some circumstances tell someone to stop praying – for example, if he were being arrested and placed in a police car. But it’s not clear, the court stressed, precisely what the circumstances of Sause’s case were. Because Sause had drafted her own complaint, the court reasoned, the federal district court that first heard her case should have interpreted it “liberally” to include “Fourth Amendment claims that could not properly be dismissed.

 

[Syriusly]

What does that story have to do with the left? The story was about a police officer who ordered someone to stop praying during a investigation inside their home.

Are you anti-cop or something?

It happened in the liberal bastion of Kansas- so he is anti-Kansas.

 

[Syriusly]

Earlier this week SCOTUS gave faith based anti abortion pregnancy centers a win in California


Supreme Court Sides With California Anti-Abortion Pregnancy Centers

Should states be able to tell clinics what they have to tell their clients?

 

[Syriusly]

Speaking of prayer- another ruling today- the court left standing a lower courts ruling prohibiting prayer at the beginning of a county board meeting.

In Rowan County v. Lund, Thomas (joined by Gorsuch) dissented from the court’s denial of review in a challenge to a North Carolina county’s practice of beginning its board meetings with a prayer led by board members. Thomas stated that the lower court’s ruling that the practice violates the Constitution’s establishment clause, which prohibits the government from endorsing a particular religion, “failed to appreciate the long history of legislator-led prayer in this country.”

 

[my2¢]

I don't like thought of police being forced to wait around while a suspect can buy time through prayer. I think it poses an additional and unnecessary risk for law enforcement.

 

[Marion Morrison]

I don't like thought of police being forced to wait around while a suspect can buy time through prayer. I think it poses an additional and unnecessary risk for law enforcement.

This is true. Pray when we get you into a cell, or in the back seat of the car.

 

[Montrovant]

I don't like thought of police being forced to wait around while a suspect can buy time through prayer. I think it poses an additional and unnecessary risk for law enforcement.

From what I read the police were there on a noise complaint. The justices seem to have taken that into consideration. "Holding: The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit erred in holding that police officers were entitled to qualified immunity without considering the ground on which the officers were present in Mary Anne Sause’s home and the nature of any legitimate law enforcement interests that might have justified their order that Sause stop praying at the specific time in question."

Sause v. Bauer - SCOTUSblog

 

[Moonglow]

WASHINGTON, June 28, 2018 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- In a surprise action today, the U.S. Supreme Court summarily reversed a lower court ruling in the case Sause v. Bauer, in which attorneys for First Liberty Institute and Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP, represent Mary Anne Sause.

“The Supreme Court’s decision today is a just outcome for Ms. Sause and a victory for religious liberty,” said Kelly Shackelford, President and CEO of First Liberty. “No American citizen should ever be ordered by government officials not to pray in their own home.”

U.S. Supreme Court Reverses Lower Court in Prayer Case

I wish this weeks News had dragged out a few weeks, I’m missing out drinking a lot of leftist tears.

The issue at hand had nothing to do with any leftist political policy...Again you misrepresent an issue to put in a cheap attack, talk about OCD.