What does it mean, for example, to assert that it is “people who are not religious” who need to be persuaded that religion is worthy of special treatment? Do all religiously observant people naturally believe that religion merits more protections than other values? There’s scant evidence for that in any event, that has not been our law, at least not until recently. But Justice Alito’s Notre Dame speech still merits close examination for what it reveals about the assumptions built into his worldview.
And later, when the court reversed itself on that issue after Justice Amy Coney Barrett’s arrival, he was part of the five-member majority that established a new “most favored nation” status for religion - meaning that any time the government, for whatever reason, grants a secular entity an exemption from a restriction or regulation, the failure to offer religion a similar exemption is presumptively unconstitutional. He was a vigorous dissenter during the early months of the Covid-19 pandemic, when the court upheld the attendance limits that governments were placing on religious as well as secular gatherings. He wrote a concurring opinion in June’s astonishing decision that permitted a high school football coach to commandeer the 50-yard line after games for his personal prayers over the public school district’s objection.
#THE CALL TO ARMS FREE#
He is the author of a long string of opinions that have elevated the free exercise of religion above civil society’s other values, including the right not to be discriminated against and the right to enjoy benefits intended for all. On one level, there is nothing surprising about such a declaration from Justice Alito.
0 kommentar(er)
