Supreme Court: Coach Can Pray on the Sidelines. Ruling 6-3

[Rogue AI]

You might have something there if the amendments to the constitution were not subject to the provisions of the constitution. There is a clause, Article VI, Clause 2 that clarifies that the constitution, which includes the amendments is the supreme law of the land.

Supremacy Clause - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Supremacy Clause would not preclude a state from doing what the federal government cannot. That is the very essence of the 10th. Nor are the states specifically prohibited from creating a state religion. It would all come down to how literal a court interpreted any attempt. I'm not claiming my view is somehow infallible, merely possible. This conversation was for the fun and sake of argument.

 

[Delldude]

Dearborn?

Why not?

 

[Concerned American]

Supremacy Clause would not preclude a state from doing what the federal government cannot. That is the very essence of the 10th. Nor are the states specifically prohibited from creating a state religion. It would all come down to how literal a court interpreted any attempt. I'm not claiming my view is somehow infallible, merely possible. This conversation was for the fun and sake of argument.

We can continue to run in circles here. But I believe it is very clear. The 1st amendment guarantees there will be no state religion (paraphrase). The constitution IS the supreme law of the country therefore, no state may create a state religion. You stated earlier that Utah was the only one who might---there is a reason they didn't -- the first amendment and the supremacy clause.

 

[eagle1462010]

 

[eagle1462010]

The fact people get offended so easily because of 30 seconds of silent prayer after a football game shows our country is Fucked.

All of you who get offended so easily are WANKERS.

 

[Borillar]

no

No, not at all. He should go to his coach and say "Nah, I don't wanna pray. I don't believe in all this superstitious mumbo jumbo." See where that gets him.

 

[flacaltenn]

I do so love drawing the fly deep into the web.

14th amendment, section one, “No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States."

I recommend reading the Constitution some time. That way, you won't get embarrassed like this again.

If only your reading comprehension matched your zeal to Google. What are "citizen's privileges and immunities? To vote? To "equal protection"? To be protected by the Bill of Rights amendments? What other "citizen privileges and immunities" are SPELLED OUT in the Constitution?

Fed govt DEFINES citizen. Any privileges and immunities they can enforce MUST EXIST ELSEWHERE in the Constitution for it to be a Federal issue. If you conflate "privileges and immunities" with RIGHTS -- this clause would be in CONFLICT with the 10th Amendment.

I know. I know !! How about having a silent prayer on the 50 yard line after a football game?
THAT would be a privilege and immunity.

 

[Rogue AI]

We can continue to run in circles here. But I believe it is very clear. The 1st amendment guarantees there will be no state religion (paraphrase). The constitution IS the supreme law of the country therefore, no state may create a state religion. You stated earlier that Utah was the only one who might---there is a reason they didn't -- the first amendment and the supremacy clause.

I'll agree to disagree and simply say thanks for a civil and thoughtful conversation.

 

[flacaltenn]

If you are a second string Wide Receiver and all other Wide a receivers are praying at the 50 yard line…….are you being coerced to join in?

No. Because the coach said in post-ruling interviews that he CHOSE players as team captains (2 of them) that did NOT participate in the silent prayers. Because he said -- it showed leadership and decision making abilities.

The media SUCKS SO BADLY because the majority of Americans are getting their news strained and purified to their snowflakeyness that you cant even have an "informed debate" anymore with most people.

 

[WEATHER53]

We can continue to run in circles here. But I believe it is very clear. The 1st amendment guarantees there will be no state religion (paraphrase). The constitution IS the supreme law of the country therefore, no state may create a state religion. You stated earlier that Utah was the only one who might---there is a reason they didn't -- the first amendment and the supremacy clause.

It’s more that the state religion can’t be imposed. It’s existence is debatable

 

[BackAgain]

Supremacy Clause would not preclude a state from doing what the federal government cannot. That is the very essence of the 10th. Nor are the states specifically prohibited from creating a state religion. It would all come down to how literal a court interpreted any attempt. I'm not claiming my view is somehow infallible, merely possible. This conversation was for the fun and sake of argument.

Wrong. You forgot the 14th Amendment and the legal doctrine of incorporation. Every provision of our 1st Amendment is now fully incorporated. This means exactly the opposite of what you just wrote. It means that no state has any legal authority to violate the 1st Amendment or any provision of that Amendment.

 

[Rogue AI]

Wrong. You forgot the 14th Amendment and the legal doctrine of incorporation. Every provision of our 1st Amendment is now fully incorporated. This means exactly the opposite of what you just wrote. It means that no state has any legal authority to violate the 1st amendment any provision of that Amendment.

The state would not be violating the 1st. That clause is specific to the federal government.

 

[BackAgain]

The state would not be violating the 1st. That clause is specific to the federal government.

Wrong. It has been fully incorporated. Therefore, it now applies equally to every state, too. That’s the point of the very words of the 14th Amendment

 

[Rogue AI]

Wrong. It has been fully incorporated. Therefore, it now applies equally to every state, too. That’s the point of the very words of the 14th Amendment

Not according to the text. The creation of a state established religion would not in any way harm the citizens provided all other religions were not infringed upon. Nowhere on the 14th does it state prohibitions to the federal Congress apply to the state legislatures.

 

[XponentialChaos]

Why not?

Why not what?

 

[BackAgain]

Not according to the text. The creation of a state established religion would not in any way harm the citizens provided all other religions were not infringed upon. Nowhere on the 14th does it state prohibitions to the federal Congress apply to the state legislatures.

Wrong. The words of the 14th Amendment are clear enough.

No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

And the SCOTUS has applied the incorporation doctrine to each of the provisions of the 1st Amendment, over the years, so that it is fully in incorporated today.

• First Amendment (fully incorporated)
  • Guarantee against the establishment of religion: Everson v Board of Education, 330 U.S. 1 (1947)
  • Free Exercise of Religion: Hamilton v. Regents of the University of California, 293 U.S. 245 (1934), Cantwell v. Connecticut, 310 U.S. 296 (1940)
  • Freedom of Speech: Gitlow v. New York 268 U.S. 652 (1925)
  • Freedom of the Press: Near v. Minnesota 283 U.S. 697 (1931)
  • Right of Assembly and Petition: DeJonge v. Oregon 299 U.S. 353 (1937)
  • Freedom of expressive association: Even though not directly mentioned in the Amendment, See Roberts v. United States Jaycees 468 U.S. 609 (1984) where the court states that “implicit in the right to engage in activities protected by the First Amendment is a corresponding right to associate with others in pursuit of wide variety of political, social, economic, educational, religious and cultural ends.”

incorporation doctrine

www.law.cornell.edu

Again, this make the prohibitions of the 1st Amendment completely binding on all of the States.

 

[Rogue AI]

Wrong. The words of the 14th Amendment are clear enough.



And the SCOTUS has applied the incorporation doctrine to each of the provisions of the 1st Amendment, over the years, so that it is fully in incorporated today.

incorporation doctrine

www.law.cornell.edu

Again, this make the prohibitions of the 1st Amendment completely binding on all of the States.

I respectfully disagree. The Everson case touches on it, but the state was not in fact attempting to establish its own religion. As such the issue remains unaddressed.

 

[BackAgain]

I respectfully disagree. The Everson case touches on it, but the state was not in fact attempting to establish its own religion. As such the issue remains unaddressed.

I said it was incorporated. I wasn’t disputing the underlying facts of any of the cases.

Because it’s incorporated, the 1st Amendment absolutely is now applicable to the States. I agree that this may not have been originally contemplated. But the 14th Amendment changed all that.

 

[Rogue AI]

I said it was incorporated. I wasn’t disputing the underlying facts of any of the cases.

Because it’s incorporated, the 1st Amendment absolutely is now applicable to the States. I agree that this may not have been originally contemplated. But the 14th Amendment changed all that.

I must still disagree due to the specific nature of the wording and it's original intent, which does not change regardless of the 14th.

It's been fun, but honestly I'm done with this line of conversation. The last word is yours.

 

[OKTexas]

Bad decision by the Court.

The Coach is a paid employee, by choosing to pray to his chosen god he is endorsing that god as part of his official duties as head coach. Endorsing one religion over all others is the first step to establishing it.

I cannot wait till the Satanist get ahold of this and start to hold their version of "prayers" after a football game.

You're full of shit. The coach prayed alone after the games, occasionally others would voluntarily join in. He was exercising his own faith, there was no official endorsement.

.