Posted on 06/20/2019 7:57:19 AM PDT by SMGFan
The Supreme Court ruled Thursday that a large cross in Maryland known as the "Peace Cross" is not in violation of the Constitution's Establishment Clause and can remain in place.
The American Legion had built 40-foot tall cross in a memorial park for World War I veterans in Maryland, and a state commission later took over responsibility for the park, including caring for the cross.
But non-Christian residents argued that the government’s care of the cross is in violation of the Constitution’s separation of church and state.
The justices were split in their rulings, with Justices Samuel Alito, Stephen Breyer, Elena Kagan and Brett Kavanaugh, along with Chief Justice John Roberts, signing on to one majority opinion, and Justices Alito, Roberts, Breyer and Kavanaugh signing on to another in respect to another aspect of the case.
Justices Neil Gorsuch and Clarence Thomas signed onto a concurring opinion.
Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Sonia Sotomayor dissented.
Where in the Constitution are the words “separation of religion and state”. What I believe I read was freedom of religion.
Time for RGB to retire.
...
The nihilistic saint of infanticide.
So will the liberals agree that this is “stare decisis” and not keep agitating and snarking about “separation of church and state” on any public display of anything which touches on religion????
Seven to two! (wise Latina and Nortorious RBG)
This is in my neighborhood, perhaps 2 or 3 miles from the house. Several of our friends worked on the early case as experts or lawyers. Looking forward to reading the opinion and seeing how the court interpreted the facts against the “Lemon Test,” doctrine that was relevant to one of my bar exam essays.
>>Time for RGB to retire.<<
She did. Her android replacement sits on the bench, complete with “sleep” mode during oral arguments and SOTU addresses.
I agree 100% with Gorsuch’s concurrence that suits like this should be dismissed for lack of standing (the “offended observer” concept is nonsense) and wish that view had prevailed, but this decision at least guarantees that a lot of historical monuments won’t be removed by leftist lower court judges, so it’s not all bad.
I agree 100% with Gorsuch’s concurrence that suits like this should be dismissed for lack of standing (the “offended observer” concept is nonsense) and wish that view had prevailed,
...
Thanks for bringing up an important fact I didn’t know.
Constitution reads, in part, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;”
For the life of me I cannot see how he separation argument holds any water at all.
Nobody has ever taken that bet.
Good, right call, but this is 20 years behind the curve. This should have been established in the 1990s.
Meanwhile, the court seems to be ducking freedom of speech, illegal immigration, and abortion as fast as it can.
The FIRST AMENDMENT is about FREEDOM OF RELIGION rather than freedom from religion. = It’s long past time for the SCOTUS to strike down every regulation/judicial decision that promotes “separation of church & state” as UNCONSTITUTIONAL.
Yours, TMN78247
she is ready to give more angry minority opinions tomorrow , and Monday and beyond until the remaining 16 cases are addressed.
How generous of SCOTUS to allow God to stay in our country.
Praise the Lord, Indeed!
Agreed. Was happy that Thomas joined his concurrence. Would that more of them would see the light on both the 'offended observer' crap and 'stare decisis' as enumerated by Thomas yesterday. Old decisions should not be granted the status as 'holy writ'.
Beautiful.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.