Ginsburg wrote little on the religion clauses, but she frequently joined with those Justices who favored a strong separation of church and state.
Church and State
With outdoor temperatures expected to pass the 100-degree mark, two Los Angeles area judges have given local churches some comforting news.
On August 2, 2020, the church again met indoors and Pastor McCoy said he was “willing to go to jail” and “willing for them to take our building” rather than comply with the state and local orders.
The ethical and moral onus is now on religious institutions as they decide whether to fire “ministerial” employees for reasons illegal in the secular world, such as age or the need for cancer treatment. Institutions engaging in this kind of discriminatory tactic will still need to answer to a Higher Source who will not be impressed with their ability to obtain summary judgment. The way for religious institutions to “win” these cases is to avoid them in the first place by taking the lead in treating employees with the highest degree of care and concern.
With the death of state Blaine Amendments this week, religious schools that welcome state money might find that they are now subject to regulation that may undermine their very reason for existence.
Although the Small Business Administration typically works with for-profit enterprises, the CARES Act does not exclude non-profit organizations from this funding, including churches. Banks will distribute these loans to qualifying organizations on a first-come, first-served basis.
When jurors are selected for trial in Federal court, they are asked to adopt the phrase “so help me God.” What happens when they take that oath too seriously?
The United States (U.S.) Supreme Court agreed to hear a case, Espinoza v. Montana Dept. of Revenue, concerning a Montana state legislative program that allowed individuals to receive up to a $150.00 tax credit for money that they could donate to one of several K-12 scholarship funds.
[dc]T[/dc]he Supreme Court has agreed to hear an appeal of a 4th Circuit decision involving a Maryland cross-shaped WWI memorial. In 2017, the 4th US Circuit Court of Appeals held 2-1 that the structure, erected in 1925, “has the primary effect of excessively endorsing religion and excessively entangles the government in religion.”
Setting the Constitutional separation of church and state issue aside, Alabama’s 10 Commandments referendum still creates theological confusion for Christians by promoting the law without the corresponding remedy of grace.