Tempers flare at Supreme Court over religious liberty case

[rangerrebew]

Tempers flare at Supreme Court over religious liberty case
by Ryan Lovelace | Apr 19, 2017, 1:24 PM

Arguments in a high-profile religious liberty case caused tempers to flare on both sides of the Supreme Court's ideological divide Wednesday.

The high court waited for several months to hear Trinity Lutheran Church of Columbia v. Comer, and did so with a full nine-justice court bolstered by the addition of Justice Neil Gorsuch, who joined the court this month. At issue in Trinity Lutheran is whether Missouri violated the Constitution in its decision to bar a church-operated daycare and preschool from a state program that provides funding to nonprofits to resurface playgrounds. Missouri's Constitution includes a provision that prevents public funds from directly or indirectly assisting any church, sect or religion.

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/tempers-flare-at-supreme-court-over-religious-liberty-case/article/2620684

[Elderberry]

More info: SCOTUSblog --Argument analysis: Justices leaning toward a ruling for Trinity Lutheran on the merits

http://www.scotusblog.com/2017/04/argument-analysis-justices-leaning-toward-ruling-trinity-lutheran-merits/

[driftdiver]

Why was this case worth going to court for let alone all the way to the supreme court?

[IsailedawayfromFR]

It appears in the article that Sotomayor was such a fool that no one rushed to her defense.

How did we ever get such a 'wise Latina' anyway?

[Restored]

You could almost smell the desperation on her. Her side might lose so toss it out.
Why does she even have a side?

[r9etb]

Why was this case worth going to court for let alone all the way to the supreme court?

It shouldn't.  There's already ample precedent at both the state and federal level for such things -- grant money can be awarded so long as it's not used for "specifically religious purposes."  Thus, for example, my church has received both state and federal grants for structural repairs because it's a historic building that happens to be a church.  On the other hand, we cannot apply for state/federal grants to repair our stained glass windows, because they have an explicitly religious purpose/message.  So we're funding those differently.

For this preschool, if they a) don't limit the preschool to members of that church; and b) the preschool playground does not serve a specifically religious purpose, it could in fact be eligible for the state grants.

The value of taking a case like this to the USSC is that it would act to moderate the overreach on "separation of church and state."

[Emjay]

It appears in the article that Sotomayor was such a fool that no one rushed to her defense.

How did we ever get such a 'wise Latina' anyway?

Why is Sotomayer so invested in this case.  It seems that the Church has a valid argument here.

[Right_in_Virginia]

More info: SCOTUSblog --Argument analysis: Justices leaning toward a ruling for Trinity Lutheran on the merits

http://www.scotusblog.com/2017/04/argument-analysis-justices-leaning-toward-ruling-trinity-lutheran-merits/

This is an excellent read  @Elderberry ... thanks for providing the link.