This was long overdue, and I should have made it per day when the supreme court did these cases. But oh well, it’s all under one megathread. This will be active for a couple of days.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    351 year ago

    A Christian website designer sued so she wouldn’t have to make sites for LGBTQ+ weddings. The court said she can refuse, citing religious freedom. It was a 6-3 vote.

    Also, it seems the web designer that sued basically made it all up. The designer didn’t have any same-sex clients. She didn’t receive any requests from gay couples to work on their wedding websites. But it doesn’t matter the court ruled that she can legally discriminate anyway.

    • Fugicara
      link
      271 year ago

      She was also not a web designer lol. Insane ruling by the SCOTUS, totally ignoring standing. Same issue with the student debt relief overturning. This court does not care about standing at all and is willing to throw out that most basic principle of law for the purpose of their judicial activism.

    • @Gullible
      link
      121 year ago

      This may create a sort of pseudoreligious legal arms race. One group will arbitrarily take away rights based on “their religion,” as has happened today, and another will attempt to recreate those rights under their own “religious” banner, as the church of satan has attempted. “Religion” will end up a focal point, regardless of the outcome, and fundamentalists win.

      • @Marmotter
        link
        91 year ago

        I have a feeling that if the church of Satan or whatever tried pushing a case under the banner of religious freedom, this court would just introduce some litmus test for which religions and believers qualify for protection under law and which do not (using originalism as a shield). And if that were to happen, I think we can confidently say that they’d find some way to implement a test that discriminated against minority beliefs in the US (e.g Islam, Hindu, atheism, indigenous faiths, etc.), further codifying the erosion of constitutional protections. I dunno, I’m obviously not a legal scholar, but I think this court is getting pretty easy to predict at this point.

        • outrageousmatterOPM
          link
          3
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          True, I don’t think the church of satan is that strong. The satanic temple on the other hand is a power house of fucking states over adding moses and some statue. Say a city builds a statue of jesus, they must allow a statue of satan since they are opening a religious form. If satan is rejected well, under the constitution they are violating religious freedom and they either must accept the state of satan or take down the statue of jesus.

    • @YoBuckStopsHere
      link
      81 year ago

      Which confirms that states can pose Jim Crow style laws against LGBTQ.