Justice Gorsuch called a high school football coach's on-field prayer 'quiet' and 'personal' as the Supreme Court sided with religious rights. Sotomayor said that description 'misconstrues the facts.'

[Dashinka 24,717]

Seems common sense.

 

Justice Gorsuch called a high school football coach's on-field prayer 'quiet' and 'personal' as the Supreme Court sided with religious rights. Sotomayor said that description 'misconstrues the facts.'

 

The Supreme Court, in a 6-3 decision handed down Monday, sided with a former high school football coach who was fired from his position for leading prayers at the 50-yard line immediately following games. 

 

Justice Neil Gorsuch delivered the majority opinion for the case, Kennedy v. Bremerton School District, writing: "The Constitution and the best of our traditions counsel mutual respect and tolerance, not censorship and suppression, for religious and nonreligious views alike."

 

https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/nfl/justice-gorsuch-called-a-high-school-football-coachs-on-field-prayer-quiet-and-personal-as-the-supreme-court-sided-with-religious-rights-sotomayor-said-that-description-misconstrues-the-facts/ar-AAYVb1h

[Mike E 11,742]

Whether you agree or disagree with the decisions …
 

1. Well this is surely the most consequential season in SCOTUS history.  I am shocked.  And the week ain’t over.  6 more major cases left to decide this season.  
 

2. Trump is the most consequential president since Lincoln.  He has surpassed Reagan and FDR.  
 

Washington, Lincoln, Trump. 
 

My god.  
 

I’m reeling.  

Edited June 27, 2022 by Mike E

[beloved_dingo 1,981]

Wonder if they would have made the same decision if the coach was Muslim or of any other religion than Christianity practicing their faith and/or praying on the field with students. 

 

The erosion of separation of church and state is extremely concerning to me. 

[Dashinka 24,717]

34 minutes ago, beloved_dingo said:

Wonder if they would have made the same decision if the coach was Muslim or of any other religion than Christianity practicing their faith and/or praying on the field with students. 

 

The erosion of separation of church and state is extremely concerning to me. 

I believe the opinion actually addressed this.  Not really sure how this is an erosion of separating church and state, did anyone pass a law promoting a certain religion?

 

In reaching its contrary conclusion, the Ninth Circuit stressed that, as a coach, Mr. Kennedy served as a role model “clothed with the mantle of one who imparts knowledge and wisdom.” 991 F. 3d, at 1015. The court emphasized that Mr. Kennedy remained on duty after games. Id., at 1016. Before us, the District presses the same arguments. See Brief for Respondent 24. And no doubt they have a point. Teachers and coaches often serve as vital role models. But this argument commits the error of positing an “excessively broad job descriptio[n]” by treating everything teachers and coaches say in the workplace as government speech subject to government control. Garcetti, 547 U. S., at 424. On this understanding, a school could fire a Muslim teacher for wearing a headscarf in the classroom or prohibit a Christian aide from praying quietly over her lunch in the cafeteria.

 

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/21-418_i425.pdf

[beloved_dingo 1,981]

53 minutes ago, Dashinka said:

I believe the opinion actually addressed this.  Not really sure how this is an erosion of separating church and state, did anyone pass a law promoting a certain religion?

 

In reaching its contrary conclusion, the Ninth Circuit stressed that, as a coach, Mr. Kennedy served as a role model “clothed with the mantle of one who imparts knowledge and wisdom.” 991 F. 3d, at 1015. The court emphasized that Mr. Kennedy remained on duty after games. Id., at 1016. Before us, the District presses the same arguments. See Brief for Respondent 24. And no doubt they have a point. Teachers and coaches often serve as vital role models. But this argument commits the error of positing an “excessively broad job descriptio[n]” by treating everything teachers and coaches say in the workplace as government speech subject to government control. Garcetti, 547 U. S., at 424. On this understanding, a school could fire a Muslim teacher for wearing a headscarf in the classroom or prohibit a Christian aide from praying quietly over her lunch in the cafeteria.

 

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/21-418_i425.pdf

But wearing a headscarf or praying over lunch isn't involving other students. I know in previous cases, there's a distinction between "forcing" kids to participate in religious activities due to their mandatory attendance (which is why prayers over the intercom in public school is not allowed). This case is a bit of a gray area considering it was at a sporting event, but for the players of that sport, attendance is mandatory and they are subjected to prayer time whether they want to be or not. 

 

I guess in my view, it is closer to "prayer over the intercom" than "praying over your own lunch". 

 

Edit: Just to clarify, there have been numerous other cases where prayers conducted before a sporting event were considered to violate the establishment clause because many students are unable to leave/choose not to participate (band, cheerleaders, athletes). The only really difference I see here is that it looks like these prayers were conducted immediately after the game. Were the athletes and other students involved in the sporting event able to immediately leave and choose not to participate with no repercussion for doing so? 

Edited June 27, 2022 by beloved_dingo

[Dashinka 24,717]

2 hours ago, beloved_dingo said:

But wearing a headscarf or praying over lunch isn't involving other students. I know in previous cases, there's a distinction between "forcing" kids to participate in religious activities due to their mandatory attendance (which is why prayers over the intercom in public school is not allowed). This case is a bit of a gray area considering it was at a sporting event, but for the players of that sport, attendance is mandatory and they are subjected to prayer time whether they want to be or not. 

 

I guess in my view, it is closer to "prayer over the intercom" than "praying over your own lunch". 

 

Edit: Just to clarify, there have been numerous other cases where prayers conducted before a sporting event were considered to violate the establishment clause because many students are unable to leave/choose not to participate (band, cheerleaders, athletes). The only really difference I see here is that it looks like these prayers were conducted immediately after the game. Were the athletes and other students involved in the sporting event able to immediately leave and choose not to participate with no repercussion for doing so? 

Actually, I don’t think the coach required anyone, players, or anyone else, to join him.  Some did, some didn’t, and from what I read of the case there was no discrimination based on participation, or lack thereof.  I do hear the Muslim argument bandied about, and honestly, in my opinion, it would make no difference.  If the coach was Muslim, and decided to pray on their own at the end of the game this opinion should also cover it.

[Mike E 11,742]

As interesting as this  ruling is, given last week’s ruling that school vouchers are legal, today’s ruling in the long run won’t mean anything. 
 

Public schools will wither as they should, and private schools, some religious, some secular, some multi denominational take their place.  
 

Religious schools funded by tax payers have worked for over  hundred years in Canada, even before Confederation. These days 6 of 13 provinces / territories fund religious schools with tax payer dollars, and 5 of those fund non-Catholic schools. 

Edited June 27, 2022 by Mike E

[Nature Boy 2.0 8,378]

11 hours ago, Dashinka said:

Actually, I don’t think the coach required anyone, players, or anyone else, to join him.  Some did, some didn’t, and from what I read of the case there was no discrimination based on participation, or lack thereof.  I do hear the Muslim argument bandied about, and honestly, in my opinion, it would make no difference.  If the coach was Muslim, and decided to pray on their own at the end of the game this opinion should also cover it.