Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Freedom OF religion also means freedom FROM religion.
Thomas is the primary originalist here, let’s not paint them all with the same brush. If Congress would impeach him, we might have a decent(ish) Court. See my list of “liberal” opinions they’re rendered (above).
Scotus has always been conservative. Get out of here with this bullshit. You think a few liberal rulings sprinkled over the cake of conservatism means anything? History has already proven otherwise.
It’s the duty of SCOTUS to interpret the Constitution into law. They already ruled against exactly this in 1980.
Stone v. Graham, case in which the U.S. Supreme Court on November 17, 1980, ruled (5–4) that a Kentucky statute requiring school officials to post a copy of the Ten Commandments (purchased with private contributions) on a wall in every public classroom violated the First Amendment’s establishment clause, which is commonly interpreted as a separation of church and state.
Freedom OF religion also means freedom FROM religion.
None of that means much of anything if the Supreme Court feels like saying otherwise.
All them Originalists on the SCROTUS gonna be like “WUT? that’s not what they meant…Now. hold this funnel for my beer…”
Thomas is the primary originalist here, let’s not paint them all with the same brush. If Congress would impeach him, we might have a decent(ish) Court. See my list of “liberal” opinions they’re rendered (above).
“Well akshually 1A specifically says Congress, but this is a state level law, so we’ll allow it”.
SCOTUS can hardly be relied on to make conservative calls. Been collecting these for a couple of months.
Scotus has always been conservative. Get out of here with this bullshit. You think a few liberal rulings sprinkled over the cake of conservatism means anything? History has already proven otherwise.
It’s the duty of SCOTUS to interpret the Constitution into law. They already ruled against exactly this in 1980.
https://www.britannica.com/event/Stone-v-Graham
Let’s just hope our newly conservative SCOTUS doesn’t have a different opinion.
Oh you.
All they have to do is redefine “establishment”. That’s child’s play for this court.
Or reverse the incorporation principle and say that Congress applies solely to the federal government.
Or cite precedent from the Spanish inquisition.