Terms of Service
Advertise with us
On Tuesday, the Supreme Court affirmed the unconstitutionality of school tuition assistance programs discriminating against students who want to attend religious schools – upholding the very essence of the First Amendment’s freedom of religion clause.
The Supreme Court STRIKES DOWN a Maine education program that provides tuition assistance for students to attend some private schools but excludes schools that provide religious instruction. SCOTUS says the exclusion of religious schools is unconstitutional.— SCOTUSblog (@SCOTUSblog) June 21, 2022
The decision, divided 6-3 along party lines, triggered far-left liberals at CNN, who screeched that majority-conservative SCOTUS justices were “bolstering religious rights” and “deciding cases on the side of religious liberties.”
CNN huffs that the Supreme Court is “bolster[ing] religious rights and decide cases on the side of religious liberties” with their ruling on Maine’s discrimination against religious schools. pic.twitter.com/den5XyBicA— Nicholas Fondacaro (@NickFondacaro) June 21, 2022
Famed masturbator Jeffrey Toobin whined the court’s decision goes against the First Amendment’s Establishment Clause, which prohibits government from establishing a state religion, claiming the court’s conservative majority was “breaking down” the distinction between that clause and the “free exercise” of religion clause.
CNN masturbation expert Jeffrey Toobin hates that the Supreme Court would protect religious liberty and end state-sponsored discrimination against religious schools.— Nicholas Fondacaro (@NickFondacaro) June 21, 2022
He claims this violates the establishment clause. “That idea is breaking down under the conservative majority.” pic.twitter.com/dOyOJSiK7Z
CNN legal analyst Jennifer Rodgers claimed the decision violated the Bill of Right’s separation between church and state, complaining the conservative SCOTUS majority was “elevating freedom of religious expression – the ‘free exercise’ clause – above the notion of the establishment clause,” adding, “It’s all breaking down.”
Legal Analyst Jennifer Rodgers claims the conservative justices are tearing down free speech by siding with religious liberty.”[T]his court is elevating the religious aspects of the First Amendment above others,” she whines. “It’s all breaking down.” pic.twitter.com/0OMARwUxTS— Nicholas Fondacaro (@NickFondacaro) June 21, 2022
Toobin also worried the court’s decision moves the country closer toward a voucher system that awards funds to students, rather than school systems, and allows them to pick their own schools.
Toobin pipes up again to decry the idea of funding students and not systems.— Nicholas Fondacaro (@NickFondacaro) June 21, 2022
“That would be, many public school advocates say, a death sentence to public schools in this country,” he frets. pic.twitter.com/EFbFxrfAYS
“That would be, many public school advocates say, a death sentence to public schools in this country,” he claimed.
SCOTUSblog’s Amy Howe broke down the background developments that culminated in the court’s decision Tuesday:
The dispute before the court in Carson v. Makin began as a challenge to the system that Maine uses to provide a free public education to school-aged children. In some of the state’s rural and sparsely populated areas, school districts opt not to run their own secondary schools. Instead, they choose one of two options: sending students to other public or private schools that the district designates, or paying tuition at the public or private school that each student selects. But in the latter case, state law allows government funds to be used only at schools that are nonsectarian – that is, schools that do not provide religious instruction.
Two Maine families went to court, arguing that the exclusion of schools that provide religious instruction violates the Constitution. On Tuesday, the justices agreed. Roberts suggested that the court’s decision was an “unremarkable” application of the justices’ prior decisions in two other recent cases: Trinity Lutheran Church v. Comer, in which the justices ruled that Missouri could not exclude a church from a program to provide grants to non-profits to install playgrounds made from recycled tires, and Espinoza v. Montana Department of Revenue, holding that if states opt to subsidize private education, they cannot exclude private schools from receiving those funds simply because they are religious.
In this case, Roberts explained, Maine pays tuition for some students to attend private schools, as “long as the schools are not religious.” “That,” Roberts stressed, “is discrimination against religion.” It does not matter, Roberts continued, that the Maine program was intended to provide students with the equivalent of a free public education, nor does it matter that the program bars benefits from going to schools that provide religious instruction. “Regardless of how the benefit and restriction are described,” Roberts concluded, the Maine program “operates to identify and exclude otherwise eligible schools on the basis of their religious exercise” – a violation of the First Amendment’s free exercise clause.
If leftists at CNN are already freaking out over the justices upholding religious freedom, imagine the meltdown if SCOTUS overturns Roe v. Wade and sides with the right to life.
Read the SCOTUS opinion on Carson v. Makin below:
posted 3 days ago
posted 5 days ago
posted 7 days ago
posted 11 days ago