SCOTUS Stupidity

[dblack]

There has always been a reasonable accommodation requirement.

And it's always been a mistake.

 

[Dragonlady]

Look for yet another bad decision from the Supremes:

Supreme Court showdown over Sabbath could change workplaces across US

A former U.S. postal worker is asking the Supreme Court to require employers to be more accommodating of religiously observant workers

abcnews.go.com

The idea that an employer should be required to accommodate the religious practices of employees is ridiculous, and as a law is a direct violation of the First Amendment. It's part of the inversion - decimation - of individual rights. We're moving away from equal rights, that apply to everyone, to special rights for special people - identity politics.

The Roberts Court has consistently ruled in favour of religious rights above all. More than any other court in history.

The Roberts Court and the Transformation of Constitutional Protections for Religion: A Statistical Portrait

The Roberts Court has ruled in favor of religious organizations far more frequently than its predecessors—over 81% of the time, compared to about 50% for all pr

papers.ssrn.com

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

It is the Supreme Court of decades ago that allowed the BS that the 14th Amendment applies to small businesses and individuals.

Wrong.

The Civil Rights Act of 1964 was upheld as Constitutional pursuant to Commerce Clause jurisprudence, having nothing to do with the 14th Amendment (see Heart of Atlanta Motel v. United States (1964)).

The Court also held that public accommodations laws do not violate the First Amendment right of freedom of association.

Conservatives are as ignorant as they are dishonest.

 

[toobfreak]

You are the one that just said multiple times the Govt should force companies to give these sorts of religions accommodations

That is as big government as it gets

That's not what I said. Learn to read.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

In fact, it was the 1960s Court that destroyed a significant black small business class and black neighborhoods when they ordered all businesses to offer service to everyone and compelled the integration of neighborhoods. And our violent crime rates also skyrocketed in the wake of those Court rulings.

This is a lie – having nothing to do with ‘fact.’

The racist right’s neo-segregationist agenda comes as no surprise.

 

[JustAGuy1]

Wrong.

The Civil Rights Act of 1964 was upheld as Constitutional pursuant to Commerce Clause jurisprudence, having nothing to do with the 14th Amendment (see Heart of Atlanta Motel v. United States (1964)).

The Court also held that public accommodations laws do not violate the First Amendment right of freedom of association.

Conservatives are as ignorant as they are dishonest.

You aren't as intelligent as the dumbest Conservative.

 

[dblack]

The Roberts Court has consistently ruled in favour of religious rights above all. More than any other court in history.

Then he should rule against the plaintiff. These laws are a violation of religious freedom.

 

[JustAGuy1]

This is a lie – having nothing to do with ‘fact.’

The racist right’s neo-segregationist agenda comes as no surprise.

Why would any self respecting Conservative want anything to do with you?

 

[whitehall]

Criticizing the Court for a case they haven't heard is a perfect example of the left that has lost it's way and can no longer deal with real issues because they really don't trust the administration. They feel more comfortable attacking Justices Thomas and Kav even when the issue isn't real.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

“Laser argued that a Supreme Court ruling in favor of Groff could empower pharmacists to not fill birth control prescriptions, city clerks to object to issuing same-sex marriage licenses and employers to treat men and women differently -- invoking religious belief or practice as justification.” ibid

Which is why this conservative Court will once again ignore and violate settled, accepted precedent and rule in favor of Groff, to the detriment of both employers and working Americans, obsessed with the tyranny of ‘religious liberty.’

 

[Harpy Eagle]

That's not what I said. Learn to read.

Too late to run from it now

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Pretty close to todays modern leftists and their forced segregation and racism

Liberals oppose conservative racism, bigotry, and hate; neo-segregationist racism is the sole purview of the right.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

So you oppose the part of the first amendment that interferes with his "free practice thereof" huh?

This has nothing to do with the First Amendment – the Free Exercise Clause concerns solely the relationship between government and those governed, not between or among private persons and private entities; in this case between a private employer and employee.

This case concerns the provision of the CRA prohibiting employers from discriminating against employees because of their religion – such as employers refusing to hire Jewish employees or firing an employee because he’s a Muslim.

But the courts have recognized a limit to the extent an employee must accommodate an employee’s religious beliefs, such as placing an undue burden on the ability of a business to function, and appropriately so.

Unfortunately this conservative Court, obsessed with subjecting private employers to the tyranny of religious dogma, will likely rule in favor of Goff, hidden behind the façade of ‘religious liberty.’

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

There has always been a reasonable accommodation requirement.

And allowing employees to dictate to employers when an employee will work because of religious beliefs is clearly unreasonable.

 

[toobfreak]

Too late to run from it now

Why do all of you leftwing a-holes always think you can just win an argument by trying to feign ignorance of your own stupidity as if it actually deflects people's attention away from your lines of gaslighting BS rather than just admit you read something wrong?

You sound worse than even Joe Biden actually trying to claim that his inflation now in 2023 is somehow a result of Trump's actions in 2019-2020 which gave us a booming economy while Joe, like Barry Obumma, were just innocent spectators along for the ride?

Year after year, you're not even imaginative enough to get yourself a new script!

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Wrong.

The Civil Rights Act of 1964 was upheld as Constitutional pursuant to Commerce Clause jurisprudence, having nothing to do with the 14th Amendment (see Heart of Atlanta Motel v. United States (1964)).

The Court also held that public accommodations laws do not violate the First Amendment right of freedom of association.

Conservatives are as ignorant as they are dishonest.

From the article in the OP:

Federal law requires employers to accommodate the religious beliefs of workers unless it would impose an "undue hardship" on business -- a standard the Supreme Court interpreted 46 years ago to mean anything more than a "de minimis cost."

So the court ruled in favor of the federal law. Nobody can tell me it gave the PO undue hardship. They have plenty of employees that could trade days with him so he can attend church. He even tried compromising with his supervisor by just sneaking out for services which is only an hour or two at most. The PO just didn't want compromise at all.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Nothing the Govt is doing is interfering with the free practice of.

The Post Office is part of government. Supposedly they are self-reliant not depending on tax dollars, but part of the federal government nonetheless.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

The Post Office is part of government. Supposedly they are self-reliant not depending on tax dollars, but part of the federal government nonetheless.

And?

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Why do all of you leftwing a-holes always think you can just win an argument by trying to feign ignorance of your own stupidity as if it actually deflects people's attention away from your lines of gaslighting BS rather than just admit you read something wrong?

Lets recap...

I said....Very true, but it still should not be forced by the Govt.

To which your replied.....Why not? The government forces everything else from baking a cake to using the right pronoun.


Now all of a sudden you did not say that.

Why hide when you words are there for everyone to see.

You sound worse than even Joe Biden actually trying to claim that his inflation now in 2023 is somehow a result of Trump's actions in 2019-2020 which gave us a booming economy while Joe, like Barry Obumma, were just innocent spectators along for the ride?

Well, yes if you knew a damn thing about economics you would understand all that free money given away in 2020 played into the inflation that followed it.

Are you truly ignorant enough to think this has no impact on the inflation today....

IF you were not a mindless partisan drone you would also understand that all Trump did was keep riding the wave he was given. Not one economic indicator changed direction after Trump took office, well at least not till COVID hit.

 

[Mac1958]

IF you were not a mindless partisan drone you would also understand that all Trump did was keep riding the wave he was given. Not one economic indicator changed direction after Trump took office, well at least not till COVID hit.

The flaw in your post is that they might understand anything outside of what they're told in their world. They have no NEED to.

They're told it was The Greatest Economy Ever In The History of Anything, and that's that.