Supreme Court backs religious freedom over restrictions!

[JaCrispy]

2 minutes ago, BillStime said:

The court opened up Pandoras box and it will backfire on everyone. 

Not so sure…this is a little bit of a different situation…but we shall see…

[BillStime]

Just now, JaCrispy said:

Not so sure…this is a little bit of a different situation…but we shall see…

Nope. Everyone can now discriminate for any reason and it’s going to go both ways.

[B-Man]

 

 

Not the Supreme Court , but still a victory for the rights of Americans.

 

 

FELLOWSHIP OF CHRISTIAN ATHLETES SCORES BIG NINTH CIRCUIT WIN FOR RELIGIOUS LIBERTY AND FREEDOM OF ASSOCIATION. 

 

 

Belief-based student groups won an important victory last week in Fellowship of Christian Athletes v. San Jose Unified School District, which restored the ability of many such groups to meet on public campuses and in public schools in the many western states covered by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.

 

Religious and other belief-based groups often limit candidates for leadership — and sometimes membership — to those who agree to a statement of principles. After all, it makes little sense to force a Muslim group, for example, to allow Christians or atheists to be its leaders, or for the College Republicans to allow Democrats to hold club office. 

 

{snip}

 

The panel also relied on another Supreme Court case, Tandon v. Newsom, a 2021 case about California COVID-19 restrictions that restricted at-home religious gatherings more than it restricted comparable activities at secular gathering places such as restaurants and hair salons. That 5-4 decision held that “regulations are not neutral and generally applicable . . . whenever they treat any comparable secular activity more favorably than religious exercise.” (Internal citations omitted.) Tandon held that the relevant universe of “comparators” is much broader than just other near-identical groups — instead, “whether two activities are comparable for purposes of the Free Exercise Clause must be judged against the asserted government interest that justifies the regulation at issue.”

 

As the Ninth Circuit found and as FIRE noted, the school district had obviously engaged in such treatment. For the first time in a federal appellate court, the Ninth Circuit acknowledged that under Tandon, the relevant “comparators” with which FCA should be compared were not just other student clubs, but any other school program, including programs run by the school. Several school-run programs and student clubs were allowed to limit attendance based on gender, race, and other protected characteristics. Yet FCA could not limit leadership based on religion. That meant the nondiscrimination policy was not “generally applicable.”

 

The court also discussed Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission, the famous 2018 “gay wedding cake case,” which prohibits decisions based on religious animus. After discussing the hostility shown toward FCA on the basis of its religious beliefs, Judge Callahan stated that the district’s argument that there was “not even ‘any whiff of antireligious animus . . . does not pass the straight-face test.” 

 

https://www.thefire.org/news/fellowship-christian-athletes-scores-big-ninth-circuit-win-religious-liberty-and-freedom

 

 

 

.