Re: Church and State


All I'm seeing on Twitter is arguments about the facts of the case. My understanding is that Gorsuch's opinion says that it's ok for a football coach to walk to the 50-yard line at the end of the game and say a silent prayer.

Posted by: peep | Link to this comment | 06-28-22 8:40 AM
horizontal rule

And I think there's also a suggestion that the coach punished people who didn't participate.

Posted by: Bostoniangirl | Link to this comment | 06-28-22 8:42 AM
horizontal rule

Is there anything stopping the lower court from saying "The supreme court's opinion doesn't apply to this case because their description of the facts doesn't match the facts of the case" and then just reaching the same conclusion again? Appellate courts don't get to decide facts, right?

Posted by: Unfoggetarian: "Pause endlessly, then go in" (9) | Link to this comment | 06-28-22 8:43 AM
horizontal rule

3: I thought that at first, but regardless of the facts, SCOTUS used the case to explicitly throw out the test that applied decently to the actual situation.

Posted by: Minivet | Link to this comment | 06-28-22 12:06 PM
horizontal rule

It's Jesus's world, we should be happy just to be allowed to live in it.

Posted by: JP Stormcrow | Link to this comment | 06-29-22 4:31 AM
horizontal rule

The degree to which the dominant faction no longer needs to demonstrate compelling logical arguments (or even stick to the facts; here's another example, from an Arizona death penalty case) really says something about their hammerlock on the Court, and the inability of Democrats to do a goddamn thing about it.

Posted by: snarkout | Link to this comment | 06-29-22 4:46 AM
horizontal rule

The power of Christ compels them.

Posted by: JP Stormcrow | Link to this comment | 06-29-22 4:50 AM
horizontal rule

4: Yeah, I haven't been able to make sense of that: The precedent isn't applicable here, but we're throwing it out anyway. If someone has seen that explained, please link.

The decision is consistent with established case law, though, in that it further reinforces the fact that this Supreme Court can do whatever the fuck it wants to do.

Posted by: politicalfootball | Link to this comment | 06-29-22 4:55 AM
horizontal rule

I think the intent is for the new precedent to be read as applying to the actual facts of the case, which is why overruling Lemon was necessary. Lying about the facts was just a weird attempt to make it sound moderate.

Posted by: LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 06-29-22 6:15 AM
horizontal rule

When I was in like third grade my parents complained that the elementary school winter concert consisted of us singing only Christmas songs. So the music teacher added that Jewish classic, I Want a Harmonica for Hanukkah. Somehow this still didn't please my parents.

Posted by: SP | Link to this comment | 06-29-22 6:36 AM
horizontal rule

I saw momma kissing Judah Macabee.

Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 06-29-22 6:40 AM
horizontal rule