U.S. Supreme Court takes aim at separation of church and state

[aubiefifty 18,248]

U.S. Supreme Court takes aim at separation of church and state

• 
  1/2

  U.S. Supreme Court takes aim at separation of church and state

  FILE PHOTO: Anti-abortion activists attend the annual "March for Life", in Washington
• 
  2/2

  U.S. Supreme Court takes aim at separation of church and state

  FILE PHOTO: Actors dressed up as Mary, Joseph and the baby Jesus to replicate the nativity scene in front of the Supreme Court during a event organized by the religious group "Faith and Liberty" to exercise First Amendment Rights and support of religious

Lawrence Hurley and Andrew Chung

Tue, June 28, 2022 at 5:08 AM

 

 

By Lawrence Hurley and Andrew Chung

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The conservative-majority U.S. Supreme Court has chipped away at the wall separating church and state in a series of new rulings, eroding American legal traditions intended to prevent government officials from promoting any particular faith.

In three decisions in the past eight weeks, the court has ruled against government officials whose policies and actions were taken to avoid violating the U.S. Constitution's First Amendment prohibition on governmental endorsement of religion - known as the "establishment clause."

The court on Monday backed a Washington state public high school football coach who was suspended by a local school district for refusing to stop leading Christian prayers with players on the field after games.

 

On June 21, it endorsed taxpayer money paying for students to attend religious schools under a Maine tuition assistance program in rural areas lacking nearby public high schools.

On May 2, it ruled in favor of a Christian group that sought to fly a flag emblazoned with a cross at Boston city hall under a program aimed at promoting diversity and tolerance among the city's different communities.

The court's conservative justices, who hold a 6-3 majority, in particular have taken a broad view of religious rights. They also delivered a decision on Friday that was hailed by religious conservatives - overturning the 1973 Roe v. Wade ruling that legalized abortion nationwide - though that case did not involve the establishment clause.

Cornell Law School professor Michael Dorf said the court's majority appears skeptical of government decision-making premised on secularism.

"They regard secularism, which for centuries has been the liberal world's understanding of what it means to be neutral, as itself a form of discrimination against religion," Dorf said of the conservative justices.

In Monday's ruling, conservative Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote that the court's aim was to prevent public officials from being hostile to religion as they navigate the establishment clause. Gorsuch said that "in no world may a government entity's concerns about phantom violations justify actual violations of an individuals First Amendment rights."

'WALL OF SEPARATION'

It was President Thomas Jefferson who famously said in an 1802 letter that the establishment clause should represent a "wall of separation" between church and state. The provision prevents the government from establishing a state religion and prohibits it from favoring one faith over another.

In the three recent rulings, the court decided that government actions intended to maintain a separation of church and state had instead infringed separate rights to free speech or the free exercise of religion also protected by the First Amendment.

But, as liberal Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote in the Maine case, such an approach "leads us to a place where separation of church and state becomes a constitutional violation."

Opinions vary over to how much flexibility government officials have in allowing religious expression, whether by public employees, on public land or by people during an official proceeding. Those who favor a strict separation of church and state are concerned that landmark Supreme Court precedents, including a 1962 ruling that prohibited prayer in public schools, could be imperiled.

"It's a whole new door that (the court) has opened to what teachers, coaches and government employees can do when it comes to proselytizing to children," said Nick Little, legal director for the Center for Inquiry, a group promoting secularism and science.

Lori Windham, a lawyer with the religious liberty legal group Becket, said the court's decisions will allow for greater religious expression by individuals without undermining the establishment clause.

"Separation of church and state continues in a way that protects church and state. It stops the government from interfering with churches but it also protects diverse religious expression," Windham added.

Most of the religious-rights rulings in recent years involved Christian plaintiffs. But the court also has backed followers of other religions including a Muslim woman in 2015 who was denied a retail sales job because she wore a head scarf for religious reasons and a Buddhist death row inmate in 2019 who wanted a spiritual adviser present at his execution in Texas.

The court also sided with both Christian and Jewish congregations in challenges based on religious rights to governmental restrictions such as limits on public gatherings imposed as public safety measures during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Nicole Stelle Garnett, a Notre Dame Law School professor who joined a brief filed with the justices backing the football coach, said the court was merely making clear that governments must treat religious people the same as everyone else.

Following Monday's ruling, many issues relating to religious conduct in schools may be litigated anew under the court's rationale that the conduct must be "coercive" in order to raise establishment clause concerns.

[wdefromtx 3,611]

Shouldn’t this go in the smack talk? 

[homersapien 12,238]

God, we really need a Muslim coach somewhere - preferably in the south -  willing to spread his prayer rug out on the 50 yard and pray toward Mecca. 

[autigeremt 7,208]

8 hours ago, homersapien said:

God, we really need a Muslim coach somewhere - preferably in the south -  willing to spread his prayer rug out on the 50 yard and pray toward Mecca. 

He would have the right to do so. 

[icanthearyou 4,468]

8 hours ago, autigeremt said:

He would have the right to do so. 

Would he (and his prayer rug) be welcomed at Auburn if he could recruit and consistently win 10+ games?

A moment for Mohamed just before the eagle flies?

[homersapien 12,238]

10 hours ago, autigeremt said:

He would have the right to do so. 

Apparently so.

But the reaction would be amusing.

[CoffeeTiger 5,876]

10 hours ago, autigeremt said:

He would have the right to do so. 

In the South he may have the "Right" to do it, but he'd also get his ass beat by Bubba Rick back behind the bleachers later that night. 

[aubiefifty 18,248]

2 hours ago, CoffeeTiger said:

In the South he may have the "Right" to do it, but he'd also get his ass beat by Bubba Rick back behind the bleachers later that night. 

i know bubba and rick. hell they stole half my band in the nineties. he used to be one of the funniest cats you would ever meet and just fun to be around. his dad coached at oxford high school and later at jsu as well and he had football stories. hell my new band opened for the first rickhead convention at the convention center at oxford lake. we were setting up a massive PA and he comes walking in with a cheeseburger plate for every single worker there. and he got it free by promising the restaurant a huge shout out for free pub.bubba and his wife changed him. maybe his child drowning in a pool got to him but he really changed. he had the best stage presence i have ever seen not a huge star. his singing was ok and he had a great scream and his fans did not care they loved him anyway.

[aubiefifty 18,248]

by the way boys they tried the open prayer thing in florida at i believe a grade school. guess who showed up? grins. the satanists with coloring books for the kids. need less to say they backed up quick. another group out west did the same thing and here come those pesky devil worshippers. i was checking out wiccans years ago and they were mostly super nice people. the satanists i never got around to looking into.

[icanthearyou 4,468]

How can someone claim they are practicing Christianity when their actions are in direct defiance of Jesus?

 

[DKW 86 7,907]

14 hours ago, icanthearyou said:

How can someone claim they are practicing Christianity when their actions are in direct defiance of Jesus?

 

Cause Brother Ray-Earl-Jim-Bob-Bubba told them from the pulpit of the Sword of the Lord, First Evangelical Church, Bait and Pawn Shop, down on the frontage road next to the Walmart. BTW, he got his ordination while finishing off a 12 pack back at the frat house. He failed at the community college...

Edited June 30, 2022 by DKW 86

[aubiefifty 18,248]

some people on here get offended if you call the church out on anything when they should be offended at many of the churches actions. I am still waiting for the church to apologize on it's stance on trump but i am not holding my breath. the second coming of jesus was one of my favorites.........

[arein0 1,105]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasnt separation of Church and State the foundation of this country?

[jj3jordan 2,171]

2 hours ago, arein0 said:

Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasnt separation of Church and State the foundation of this country?

Religious freedom would be more accurate. The immigrants wanted to get away from England having an official government church.