They haven't started yet, but the 5-minute-warning buzzer just sounded.
Watch the roll out of new cases at SCOTUSblog, here.
1. "The Court holds that both the free exercise and free speech clauses protect [a coach's] right to pray at midfield following high school football games." Here's the opinion, Kennedy v. Bremerton School District. From the syllabus of the opinion:Petitioner Joseph Kennedy lost his job as a high school football coach in the Bremerton School District after he knelt at midfield after games to offer a quiet personal prayer....
The Free Exercise and Free Speech Clauses of the First Amendment protect an individual engaging in a personal religious observance from government reprisal; the Constitution neither mandates nor permits the government to suppress such religious expression.
2. Concepcion — written by Sotomayor and joined by Thomas, Breyer, Kagan and Gorsuch. With that lineup, how could it be wrong? SCOTUSblog summary:
Concepcion is a case about whether, when a court is deciding whether to resentence a defendant under the First Step Act, which gives federal district courts power to resentence offenders in light of changes in the Fair Sentencing Act of 2010, a district court must or may consider intervening developments, or whether such developments only come into play (if at all) after courts conclude that a sentence reduction is appropriate.... The Court holds that the First Step Act allows district courts to consider intervening changes of law or fact in exercising their discretion to reduce a sentence.
3. A unanimous case written by Justice Breyer, Ruan: "This is a case about whether a doctor who has the authority to prescribe controlled substances can be convicted for unlawful distribution of those drugs when he reasonably believed that his prescriptions fell within professional norms.... The answer is that once a defendant meets the burden of producing evidence that his or her conduct was 'authorized,' then the government has to show beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant knowingly or intentionally acted in an unauthorized manner."
पोस्ट्स
३४ टिप्पण्या:
Sotomayor the Crank in dissent again.
Concepción. Racism much?
And the Gaylor family weeps.
If it is okay for Colin Kaepernick to kneel during the National Anthem, it is okay for this gentleman to kneel in prayer after a game. I don't know why this is so hard to understand. He wasn't FORCING anybody to kneel with him.
I'm totally delighted for Coach Kennedy. I particularly admire the example he has set for his team by taking this all the way to the Supreme Court.
Should be a 9-0 decision. Progressives will try and enforce a rule that one cannot even silently pray if they confirm said prayer to any third party.
Prayers from ALL excepted, correct? Catholics, Protestants, Muslims Moonies and any coach with a whistle good to go. If it's same situation, lets watch and see. I have a suspicion it won't be agreement for all religions no matter what the court says.
In the ratings of Supreme Court opinions this year, the cause for principled interpretation of the Constitution has earned a Super Hat Trick.
As Bob Hope said in the ‘60s when prayer in schools was banned, “As long as teachers give tests, there will be prayer in schools.” Amen.
The 3 = the usual suspects,
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vtSmfws0_To
Re Kennedy: Interesting that the three stooges are virtually always predictably doctrinaire and anti-Constitutional.
Re Concepción: Interesting that that conservatives are not virtually always predictable.
You, a (retired) law professor.
>Petitioner Joseph Kennedy lost his job as a high school football coach in the Bremerton School District after he knelt at midfield after games to offer a quiet personal prayer....<
Yeah, it was so "personal" that he just had to do it out in the middle of the field of a football stadium so that he could be sure to be seen doing it by hundreds of people. This is pure ostentatious religiosity - righteous virtue showboating.
Back when I was a young Sunday School-indoctrinated kid who thought that there was actually something on the receiving end, even I understood that one could quietly and personally pray to the Omniscient One by simply saying the prayer in one's mind - all without the need for posturing or for having an audience to my piety.
I have a suspicion it won't be agreement for all religions no matter what the court says.
Maybe I should ask the lefties to teach me mind reading. They all seem very skilled at it.
They haven't started yet, but the 5-minute-warning buzzer just sounded
That means the rowdiest Justices are finally out of the penalty box, and ready to start slugging.
"If it is okay for Colin Kaepernick to kneel during the National Anthem, it is okay for this gentleman to kneel in prayer after a game"
But he got fired for doing so, something this school is now unable to do.
DINKY DAU 45 said...
Prayers from ALL excepted, correct? Catholics, Protestants, Muslims Moonies and any coach with a whistle good to go. If it's same situation, lets watch and see. I have a suspicion it won't be agreement for all religions no matter what the court says.
6/27/22, 9:51 AM
Who cares if it is after the game, and they aren't forcing others to join in??
If Kennedy had lost, government employees would have had to delete their prayer tracking apps.
Sorry Mark,
You are misrepresenting the facts.
Kaepernick got fired because je was a lousy QB and a distraction to the team with his diva antics. Plenty of other FB players knelt and were not disciplined in any way.
ostentatious religiosity
LOL. Didn’t know Ice Nine was so funny. Our entire economy is being sacrificed to the false god of Global Warming but we should be concerned about this one man giving the God of the Bible public praise. Interesting how the ostentatious executive orders grinding our middle class down were not enough to trigger you but this stranger so far away sets you off. Diversity is fascinating!
In Kennedy, people seem to think that the moral question is what the USSC ought to be considering. That's the problem - that's not the USSC's job, or even within its powers.
Is it fair that an atheist, or even just non-Christian, student should feel pressured to join in to a clearly Christian ritual? Is it fair that that student should feel left out, not a part of the team, if they do not join in?
I doubt that it is fair. I accept this argument.
But that has no bearing here, given the Justices' job description. They are there only to determine how the US Constitution speaks to this question, not to legislate morality.
The USSC has determined that the US Constitution does NOT contain the prohibition on the exercise of religion that has been claimed by the school district. They have determined that the school district has mis-interpreted and mis-used the Constitution in its firing of the coach.
That's the correct role for the USSC. They should not simply substitute "fairness" for the words in the Constitution. And that is the job they have now fulfilled, in this case, and in Dobbs.
This is working out to be a good court, one that recognizes its structural role and limitations.
I forgot all about today's announcements, too-- walked out to the supermarket and back before the morning's temperature reached 70; yesterday the temperature reached 92, the breeze died, and I was well-roasted. Paying attention to SCOTUSblog's live-blogging is amusing enough occasionally but I had enough of it last week.
If this keeps up, the progressive justices might be forced to read the Constitution to meaningfully respond.
Also day for orders on cert petitions. Thomas writes dissent from denial of petition seeking to overturn NY Times v Sullivan actual malice standard. No one joins.
"Concepcion....with that line-up, how could it be wrong?"
Because it's a judicial decision that further waxes the pride of judges who quiver excitedly with the perverse and now wildly expanded illicit power misnamed "discretion," which in this case means they get to ignore the law they have frigging pledged to uphold, not bend over and screw.
Rather than fuss over gun control, we could substantially lower the bodies piled up far from the oh-so-guarded cul-de-sacs of the legal Eloi by taking "discretion" away from judges and returning it to the legislatures, where it damn well belongs.
No matter how many times we try to institute minimum mandatories for raping children, for example, judges are especially fond, with this crime, of exercising their "discretion" to let the baby buggerer off with probation.
Junkies get a day off. Next opinion day Wednesday.
1. "The Court holds that both the free exercise and free speech clauses protect [a coach's] right to pray at midfield following high school football games."
Absolutely correct decision
News flash: Anything that anyone else can do, so can the religious do. Do you fell left out because you don't want to be part of a prayer? Ban all public displays of environmentalism, and we'll talk.
Oh, and children: the school the fired him was a government school. Keep was fired by a PRIVATE team.
I do love how it's perfectly fine for a "private company!!11!" like Twitter or Facebook to censor people, but it's entirely different when it happens to the Left
2. Concepcion — written by Sotomayor and joined by Thomas, Breyer, Kagan and Gorsuch. With that lineup, how could it be wrong?
I'm generally willing to give Thomas the benefit of the doubt. I disagree with the decision, but I dont' feel strongly about it
3. A unanimous case written by Justice Breyer, Ruan: "This is a case about whether a doctor who has the authority to prescribe controlled substances can be convicted for unlawful distribution of those drugs when he reasonably believed that his prescriptions fell within professional norms.... The answer is that once a defendant meets the burden of producing evidence that his or her conduct was 'authorized,' then the government has to show beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant knowingly or intentionally acted in an unauthorized manner."
I note that if the people who had created Roe / Casey had actually meant what they claimed, this case never would have happened. Because if I have a "right to control my own body in consultation with my physician", then the Feds can never complain about my painkiller prescriptions.
That said, the ruling was entirely correct, and a very good thing
The Ever Increasingly Dumb Lefty Mark: "But he got fired for doing so, something this school is now unable to do."
LOL
Its like you aren't even trying anymore...not that it makes much difference really.
"Yeah, it was so "personal" that he just had to do it out in the middle of the field of a football stadium so that he could be sure to be seen doing it by hundreds of people. This is pure ostentatious religiosity - righteous virtue showboating."
Did he say that publicly (link, if you have one please) or are you imagining something that confirms your prejudices?
DINKY DAU: Prayers from ALL excepted, correct? Catholics, Protestants, Muslims Moonies and any coach with a whistle good to go. If it's same situation, lets watch and see. I have a suspicion it won't be agreement for all religions no matter what the court says.
Liberals are constantly projecting their own insane, vile bigotry and prejudice on normal people.
Prayers from ALL excepted, correct?
Yes. Stop projecting.
Mark: But he got fired for doing so, something this school is now unable to do.
The 49ers are a private business. They can do what they want.
But he got fired for doing so, something this school is now unable to do.
No. He did not.
He quit because he was 3-19 in his last 22 starts and was backing up Blaine Freaking Gabbert when he thought he should be the starter.
Why can't you people get even the basic things correct?
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा