Shutterstock
Here are two of the latest stories making news as the Supreme Court weighs in on religion and individual liberties.
Kavanaugh has weighed in on at least three incidents where he felt that states stepped on the liberty of individuals on the basis of religion set forth in the Constitution.
Observers point to two recent Supreme Court decisions that denied review of lower-court decisions, are an indication that justice Brett Kavanaugh appears to be ready to put forth his personal stamp on the law books by Wayne in on religious liberty. Of course, there will be a majority in the court that support his views is unclear.
This week, Kavanaugh was joined by Justices Alito and Gorsuch in issuing a five-page statement regarding a decision in New Jersey, Morris County v. Freedom From Religion Foundation, which withheld funds from religious buildings within its program of funding the preservation of historic buildings on the grounds the separation of church and state. However, the justices saw the withholding of the funds as the lobbying taken too far to the point of violating the Constitution’s fundamental guarantee of equality. Kavanaugh wrote: “In my view, prohibiting historic preservation grants to religious organizations simply because the organizations are religious would raise serious questions under this Court’s precedents and the Constitution’s fundamental guarantee of equality.”
In another ruling, Kennedy v. Bremerton School District, which concerned a high school football coach in Washington State who was dismissed for praying on the football field after games. Kavanaugh along with Justices Alito, Thomas and Gorsuch, took the Ninth Circuit tthe task, calling their ruling “troubling,” regarding its “understanding of the free speech rights of public school teachers.”
Kavanaugh also criticized the courts over their decision regarding religion in Employment Division v. Smith (1990), and Trans World Airlines, Inc. v. Hardison(1977). A comment by Justice Alito, who also weighed in on both matters, seems to indicate that he feels future petitioners should request the court “to revisit those decisions.”
Earlier this year a battle between the state of Colorado and Baker Jack Phillips went all the way to the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court voted in favor of Phillips in a 7-2 ruling finding that the Colorado Civil Rights Commission was hostile to his faith and failed to act neutrally toward his religion.
However, the court did not take it as far as some would have liked by addressing the key question in the matter – whether a business can refuse services to LGBT people because of religious objections.
This week, in light of the Supreme Court decision, the Colorado Civil Rights Commission voted unanimously to drop its state administrative case against Phillips and his bakery. In response, Phillips agreed to dismiss his case against the state of Colorado in federal court, which argued that the commission was continuously hostile towards his religious beliefs. Ultimately, both sides agreed it was not in anyone’s best interest to move forward with the cases.
