202 points

He wants it to go all the way to the supreme court so they can rule in his favor and further erode the separation of church and state. Fuck these assholes and this timeline…

permalink
report
reply
67 points

Honestly, I can’t see how SCOTUS could rule in his favour. The US constitution clearly states that there is a seperation between church and state. For SCOTUS to rule in his favour would require them overturning the constitution itself.

permalink
report
parent
reply
70 points
*
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
57 points

Also

  1. The current conservative SCOTUS doesn’t care about precedent or the constitution and will rule however they want.
permalink
report
parent
reply
24 points

That whole “it only applies to Congress” angle is malarkey.

303 Creative v. Elenis: The 1st Amendment bars Colorado from forcing businesses to provide service that goes against their religious beliefs.

Shurtleff v. City of Boston: The City of Boston could not reject flying a Christian flag when it had open many other groups to fly different flags for various occasions.

Kennedy v. Bremerton School District: A school board wrongfully terminated a coach for praying on the field.

These are all recent cases too. Of course, that doesn’t mean they won’t find some different bullshit reason to say this is fine.

permalink
report
parent
reply
11 points

The actual text concerning religion says that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;…”. It’s arguable that requiring publicly funding schools to display a specific religions moral code is establishing their religious views as a standard others must follow.

The second part of that (prohibiting the free exercise thereof) is not affected. They are free to do whatever they want in their private homes and institutions. They just are not free to force those practices on others or other’s children. You don’t have the freedom to “exercise” if exercise means forcing your will on others. And anyone that thinks that should be the case is specifically calling to remove that constitutional freedom from our society.

It’s un-American… by definition…

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

Wouldn’t the combo of the first amendment and the supremacy clause pretty neatly dismantle the new Louisiana law?

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

Re: 1, the concept of church/state separation is espoused by the First Amendment, if not explicitly stated as such. But as has been made clear, Roberts’ SCOTUS has yet to miss a case dismantling that wall.

Re: 2, SCOTUS has held that amendments only apply to Congress unless they have been incorporated via the 14th out to the states. The First Amendment’s restriction on state-endorsed religion was incorporated in a case from 1947 called Everson vs. Board of Education which means that if Congress can’t create an official government religion, state legislatures can’t either. Of course, what one SCOTUS decides another can overturn, so it’s not out of the realm of possibility for Roberts’ activist Court to remove the concept of incorporation altogether.

permalink
report
parent
reply
42 points

For SCOTUS to rule in his favour would require them overturning the constitution itself.

Nah, all they’d have to do is make up a bullshit interpretation that fits the political opinions of them and their billionaire friends. That’s basically what the majority of them are there for to begin with.

permalink
report
parent
reply
26 points

The Constitution also clearly states that anyone who breaks their oath of office to commit treason against the country shall not hold political office unless cleared by 2/3rds majority in Congress. It’s time to admit that the rules are all made up and the Constitution doesn’t matter.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

I read that in his voice.

permalink
report
parent
reply
24 points

The SCOTUS is thoroughly corrupt. We have three sitting justices who have been exposed as accepting bribes from parties with matters before the court, and we have two that are known to have committed perjury during their confirmation hearings.

There is zero accountability or recourse. We no longer live in a country with a rule of law.

permalink
report
parent
reply
21 points

I agree with this. I dont think this one was thought through. We shall see what the illegitimate court thinks. If they agree with him that should be our final line as a people.

permalink
report
parent
reply
19 points

The Constitution is just an interpretation of the teachings of the Founding Fathers. SCOTUS is the only body that has a direct line of communication to the Founding Fathers. We can rely on them to convey to the masses what the Founding Fathers truly intended.

(I think this is sarcasm, but I wouldn’t be surprised if they used this logic)

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

I only acknowledge direct lines to dead ppl if they got stupid hats and a custom made vehicle and I don’t see any supreme mobiles.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Haven’t they already done that by using stuff that’s in the constitution or any law?

permalink
report
parent
reply
16 points

Maybe youth weren’t paying attention to the Dobbs decision where they ignored the 9th amendment entirely and half of the 14th.

permalink
report
parent
reply
12 points

The SCOTUS ruling on college loan forgiveness they simply said “we know the law explicitly says that you can do this but we don’t like it so, no and we’re not actually justifying this decision with any kind of criteria”

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

Why would Robert’s Supreme Court care about the Constitution?

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

The Constitution specifically states, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;” which is probably going to mean SCOTUS will rule that it’s okay because it’s a STATE Congress and not the federal Congress specifically called out in the Constitution making a law respecting the establishment of a religion. This seems like a solid letter of the law but not the spirit sort of reading that christofacists want.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points
*

The US constitution clearly states that there is a seperation between church and state.

Unfortunately, I don’t believe you’ll find that wording in the constitution.

permalink
report
parent
reply
13 points

Exactly right… what should happen is that the Satanic Church, any Islam denomination, the Spaghetti Monster, etc should all start putting up their own billboards everywhere…

While SCOTUS is compromised, there is no point in playing their game

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points
*

Just a heads up The Satanic Temple are the righteous group that litigates all these radical zealots. They don’t believe in a literal Satan unlike the Church of Satan.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

Church of Satan is also atheistic, although some may believe in magic and other energy work. Either way, neither group literally worships Satan. You might be thinking of the Order of Nine Angles.

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

Damnit Abed. Do not roll the dice.

permalink
report
parent
reply
36 points

Once they start allowing exceptions to separation of church and state it also tears down the door of free speech and allows people to be prosecuted for blasphemy or whatever nonsense actual witch hunting

permalink
report
reply
14 points

Hey kids! There are lots of fun ways to break the 1st Commandment!

List of some random gods in order of importance

  1. Asherah

  2. Her husband Yahweh

permalink
report
reply
8 points

I suggest we all start revering Ahura Mazda.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Zoom zoom

permalink
report
parent
reply
13 points
*

If this goes the way he wants, he’ll also get the Seven Tenets everywhere the Ten Commandments are.

permalink
report
reply
12 points

There’s so many religions and so many rules. Let’s just post them all.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

We can create a new one with all of the rules!

permalink
report
parent
reply
13 points

I can’t Wait until the Supreme Court makes it LEGAL to Force Schools to post Satanic Text in EVERY classroom!

permalink
report
reply
1 point
*

What about my religion? We have core tenants to existence…

1: Thou shall not bitch about what thou finds out, after thou fucketh around.

2: Thy Lord and Savior hath empowered thou to skip school and throw rocks at parked luxury SUVs without consequence.

3: Any other religious commandment system preceding or proceeding this system are an affront to thy mental sovereign, and must be vandalized or destroyed before any other task can be done.

permalink
report
parent
reply

politics

!politics@lemmy.world

Create post

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to “Mom! He’s bugging me!” and “I’m not touching you!” Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That’s all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

Community stats

  • 10K

    Monthly active users

  • 12K

    Posts

  • 217K

    Comments