Tuesday, June 22, 2021

A ‘Win’ for Religious Liberty?

 

Christians/Conservatives are setting themselves up for disappointment (again) by their enthusiasm over the [u]S Supreme Court’s decision in Fulton v City of Philadelphia:

https://afa.net/the-stand/culture/2021/06/major-legal-victory-for-religious-liberty/

http://www.monomakhos.com/i-wonder-how-the-libs-are-going-to-pin-this-one-on-putin/

We welcome the decision, but as with other supposed ‘wins’ lately (like the Jack Phillips case), there is poison mixed in with the honey.  Daniel Horowitz writes,


 . . .


Barrett's concurrence, joined by Kavanaugh and Breyer, painstakingly explains how overruling Smith would create problems with other bad prior court decisions and would engender a new rule of judicial construct to replace it. Sadly, this is the excuse the justices will likely give to perpetuate terrible rulings on other issues that are moored in faulty constitutional interpretation in the future. The proper rule is to apply strict scrutiny to any religious liberty challenge, as we do in abortion cases. This is really quite simple.


The specific application of not overruling Smith is right in front of our noses. Under the current ruling, were the case of Jack Phillips to come back before the Supreme Court, the justices would say that Colorado has the right to force him to bake a transgender celebration cake because they apply that rule strictly to everyone. Following the Constitution would net a different result.


This case is also an ominous sign for the growing assault on religious exemptions from coerced vaccination. States could easily point to a categorical rule without any exceptions as solid footing for ignoring religious exemptions.


If this is what a victory looks like, I'd hate to see what a loss would be at the Supreme Court. If this is a conservative Supreme Court, we can only imagine a liberal one.


--https://www.theblaze.com/op-ed/horowitz-religious-liberty-in-the-supreme-court-if-this-is-a-victory-what-would-a-loss-look-like

More analysis of the current federal Supreme Court:

https://www.politico.com/news/2021/06/17/alito-supreme-court-trump-495121

Via https://www.revolver.news/2021/06/law-prof-alito-was-just-pissed-with-spineless-conservatives-on-supreme-court/

(Thanks to the nameless individual for the above two links.)

https://www.cnn.com/2021/06/18/politics/roberts-kavanaugh-barrett-supreme-court/index.html

(Via Drudge Report)

Courts are a valuable part of our European heritage, and we should try to get good judges on the bench; but they are not the only safeguard when seeking redress for wrongs, protection from oppressors, etc.:

https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2021/06/good-judges-wont-save-you/

Lastly, Dr Tom Woods and Michael Malice humorously discuss the history, etc., of the federal Supreme Court:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GEgdAxA2T1A

Via https://www.lewrockwell.com/lrc-blog/the-politically-incorrect-guide-to-____________-starring-tom-woods-michael-malice/

--

Holy Ælfred the Great, King of England, South Patron, pray for us sinners at the Souð, unworthy though we are!

Anathema to the Union!

No comments:

Post a Comment