Supreme Court rules In favor of religious Liberty for Postal Worker keeping Sunday

[BobRyan]

Title has been changed from "Supreme Court rules against religious Liberty for Postal Worker keeping Sunday" to its present title "rules IN FAVOR of religious Liberty" -- 20230712
=========================

Postal worker wanting to keep Sunday as a sacred/sanctified/set-apart day for worship -- is denied religious liberty by SCOTUS?

Do you have a right to miss work to honor the Sabbath? The Supreme Court will decide

This former postal worker wants to honor the Sabbath by not working on Sundays. The Supreme Court will weigh in on what employers owe to religious workers like him.

www.deseret.com

Supreme Court Weighs Clash of Postal Worker’s Sabbath and Sunday Deliveries (Published 2023)

The justices have been receptive to claims of religious freedom and may take a broad view of a federal law that requires employers to “reasonably accommodate” workers’ religious practices.

www.nytimes.com

A lot of opportunity for the Supreme court to uphold religious liberty in this 2023 case

Supreme Court hears case that could expand religious rights of workers

The case involves a former Postal Service worker who says he was unlawfully punished for refusing to work on Sundays to observe the Sabbath.

www.cbsnews.com

As of June 22 we were "Still waiting" for the decision (which was later passed in favor of Religious Liberty)

Still waiting for Supreme Court ruling in former Quarryville postal worker's case

As the U.S. Supreme Court nears the end of its term, it still has more than a dozen opinions to release — including Groff v. DeJoy, a case involving Gerald

lancasteronline.com

But the conservatives were once again "divided"

https://www.npr.org/2023/04/18/1170700730/supreme-court-conservatives-divided-religion-case-sabbath-employers

 

[BobRyan]

It looks like the ruling will be released on Thursday -- but I saw a report recently where it appeared they ruled against affirming religious liberty in the case of the postal worker in the Groff case. Would prefer that I am misremembering that at this point.

 

[FireDragon76]

It's a feature, not a bug. They care about religion up until it costs their rich benefactors productivity/money.

 

[Daniel and the Lions]

It looks like the ruling will be released on Thursday -- but I saw a report recently where it appeared they ruled against affirming religious liberty in the case of the postal worker in the Groff case. Would prefer that I am misremembering that at this point.

I thought that the state is supposed to uphold the freedoms granted by the Constitution. Especially if this employee is well established, he should be granted the choice to take Sunday off.

 

[BobRyan]

I thought that the state is supposed to uphold the freedoms granted by the Constitution. Especially if this employee is well established, he should be granted the choice to take Sunday off.

And that is what the ruling turned out to be in the end -- they affirmed that right.

The problem was a SCOTUS decision that passed in 1977 saying that an employer could deny religious liberty accommodation so long as they could show a burden on the company that rose "Above minimum" --- so then "above nothing". It was set as the lowest protection possible in the work place for workers when it came to religious liberty. This recent decision changes all that.

 

[FireDragon76]

I thought that the state is supposed to uphold the freedoms granted by the Constitution. Especially if this employee is well established, he should be granted the choice to take Sunday off.

It's all about who has the presumed power to interpret the Constitution. Considering that most of the Supreme Court is packed with pro-business interests, rulings like this are not surprising.

 

[BobRyan]

It's all about who has the presumed power to interpret the Constitution. Considering that most of the Supreme Court is packed with pro-business interests, rulings like this are not surprising.

Actually this 2023 ruling was in favor of religious liberty. It was the 1977 ruling that has been in place so long - that opposed it.

 

[Truth7t7]

And that is what the ruling turned out to be in the end -- they affirmed that right.

The problem was a SCOTUS decision that passed in 1977 saying that an employer could deny religious liberty accommodation so long as they could show a burden on the company that rose "Above minimum" --- so then "above nothing". It was set as the lowest protection possible in the work place for workers when it came to religious liberty. This recent decision changes all that.

Yes the conservative court ruled in the right of center, under the word "de minimis" with a broad interpretation, the employer must show an undue burden that is substantial vs minimal

It's definitely a big step in the right direction, the decisions out of this session have been phenomenal for the conservatives

We got the ship moving, full steam ahead!

The liberal agenda is unraveling like a ball of yarn in a tornado and I love it, shoes on the other foot now, about time!

(Obergefell V Hodges) same sex marriage reversal up next, stay tuned!

 

[BobRyan]

Yes the conservative court ruled in the right of center, under the word "de minimis" with a broad interpretation, the employer must show an undue burden that is substantial vs minimal

It's definitely a big step in the right direction, the decisions out of this session have been phenomenal for the conservatives

We got the ship moving, full steam ahead!

amen to that

The liberal agenda is unraveling like a ball of yarn in a tornado and I love it, shoes on the other foot now, about time!

(Obergefell V Hodges) same sex marriage reversal up next, stay tuned!

I am optimistic but I have to tell you I think the horse is already out of the barn on that one. There is no getting it back to moral norms of the Bible when it comes to marriage. My hope is that the whole LGBTQ...etc rage against Christians having their moral values is "diminished" in the courts to the point that Christians can still have jobs, quote the Bible, state their beliefs etc - even when those views do not line up with LGBTQ demands.

 

[Truth7t7]

amen to that

I am optimistic but I have to tell you I think the horse is already out of the barn on that one. There is no getting it back to moral norms of the Bible when it comes to marriage. My hope is that the whole LGBTQ...etc rage against Christians having their moral values is "diminished" in the courts to the point that Christians can still have jobs, quote the Bible, state their beliefs etc - even when those views do not line up with LGBTQ demands.

The tide has turned on the homosexuals harassing Christians

The recent ruling like 2 weeks ago in the US Supreme Court in this session put that baby to bed

The web designer in Colorado that refused service to two homosexuals in a same sex marriage was given victory in the 6/3 majority decision

A clip from the Majority opinion written by Justice Gorsuch below, his opinion established that denial of service based upon belief was protected under the 1st amendment in free speech, a "broad opinion" that sets precedent over many situations, a massive victory for conservatives

Quote Justice Gorsuch:

"the constitution protected an individual’s right to free speech “regardless of whether the government considers his speech sensible and well intentioned or deeply misguided”.

US supreme court strikes blow against LGBTQ+ rights with Colorado ruling​

June 30, 2023

Web designer backed by Christian group argued making websites for same-sex couples would violate her first amendment rights

In his majority opinion, Gorsuch said that the first amendment prohibited Colorado from “forcing a website designer to create expressive designs speaking messages with which the designer disagrees”. Backed by the other five rightwing justices who now control the court, he said the constitution protected an individual’s right to free speech “regardless of whether the government considers his speech sensible and well intentioned or deeply misguided”.

The ruling prompted an excoriating dissent from the three liberal justices. Written by Sonia Sotomayor and joined by Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson, the dissent noted that the decision was the first time in supreme court history that a business open to the public had been granted a constitutional right to refuse to serve people from a protected group.

“Today is a sad day in American constitutional law and in the lives of LGBT people,” Sotomayor lamented. The symbolic effect, she said, was to “mark gays and lesbians for second-class status. In this way, the decision itself inflicts a kind of stigmatic harm … The opinion of the court is, quite literally, a notice that reads: ‘Some services may be denied to same-sex couples’.”

 

[FireDragon76]

The tide has turned on the homosexuals harassing Christians

The recent ruling like 2 weeks ago in the US Supreme Court in this session put that baby to bed

The web designer in Colorado that refused service to two homosexuals in a same sex marriage was given victory in the 6/3 majority decision

There is no tide of gays harassing Christians.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

The tide has turned on the homosexuals harassing Christians

The recent ruling like 2 weeks ago in the US Supreme Court in this session put that baby to bed

The web designer in Colorado that refused service to two homosexuals in a same sex marriage was given victory in the 6/3 majority decision

A clip from the Majority opinion written by Justice Gorsuch below, his opinion established that denial of service based upon belief was protected under the 1st amendment in free speech, a "broad opinion" that sets precedent over many situations, a massive victory for conservatives

Quote Justice Gorsuch:

"the constitution protected an individual’s right to free speech “regardless of whether the government considers his speech sensible and well intentioned or deeply misguided”.

It hasn't put any "baby to bed." I wouldn't get that confident. The US legal system has a tendency to oscillate.

 

[Truth7t7]

It hasn't put any "baby to bed." I wouldn't get that confident. The US legal system has a tendency to oscillate.

I
The baby is put to bed, the ruling is in, the gavel has dropped, read again post #10 that was incomplete at your response,

It's going to be a conservative US Supreme Court 6/3 Super majority for a long time, hang on to your hat, the liberal agenda is being unraveled like a ball of yarn in a tornado!

(Obergefell V. Hodges) same sex marriage "Reversal" up next, stay tuned!

 

[Truth7t7]

There is no tide of gays harassing Christians.

Try telling that to the Colorado Christian cake baker (Jack Phillips) that was taken to court like 3-4 times over a 7 year period for refusing to bake cakes depicting same sex marriage

 

[FireDragon76]

Try telling that to the Colorado Christian cake baker (Jack Phillips) that was taken to court like 3-4 times over a 7 year period for refusing to bake cakes depicting same sex marriage

Do you even understand how this stuff works? This was a test case, meaning political activists and law firms look to create a legal case to test a law. It isn't representative of Christians in general being harassed.

The notion that Christians in general in the US are subject to persecution or harassment for their beliefs is a distortion of reality, it is a delusional belief not supported by evidence. The majority of American still identify as Christian and there are many informal social priveleges attached to the religion. So the persecution narrative is frankly not credible.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

I
The baby is put to bed, the ruling is in, the gavel has dropped, read again post #10 that was incomplete at your response,

It's going to be a conservative US Supreme Court 6/3 Super majority for a long time, hang on to your hat, the liberal agenda is being unraveled like a ball of yarn in a tornado!

(Obergefell V. Hodges) same sex marriage "Reversal" up next, stay tuned!

You've misunderstood me, Truth.

I don't trust that the "Liberal Agenda" has been unraveled since the "Liberal Agenda" (of increasing intensity every few decades) has been part and parcel of this nation's constitutional ideology since its founding.

So, while even as a fellow Christian I can empathize (however, moderately or minimally) with you on some political points, I'm under absolutely no illusion [or dominionist delusion] that our nation will ever become or stay Ultra-Conservative, let alone ever become a Christian nation. At least not until Christ returns.

I'm "staying tuned." That's what I do.

 

[Truth7t7]

You've misunderstood me, Truth.

I don't trust that the "Liberal Agenda" has been unraveled since the "Liberal Agenda" (of increasing intensity every few decades) has been part and parcel of this nation's constitutional ideology since its founding.

So, while even as a fellow Christian I can empathize (however, moderately or minimally) with you on some political points, I'm under absolutely no illusion [or dominionist delusion] that our nation will ever become or stay Ultra-Conservative, let alone ever become a Christian nation. At least not until Christ returns.

I'm "staying tuned." That's what I do.

It appears you misunderstood me, I never claimed this was going to become a theocracy, however it's a fact that the recent Supreme Court rulings from this session are heading in the conservatives favor, and I can't wait to see more!

Liberal rulings that took decades to prepare for and implement through the courts are being reversed before our eyes, a good thing, and it's not stopping here

Jesus Is The Lord

 

[2PhiloVoid]

It appears you misunderstood me, I never claimed this was going to become a theocracy, however it's a fact that the recent Supreme Court rulings from this session are heading in the conservatives favor, and I can't wait to see more!

Liberal rulings that took decades to prepare for and implement through the courts are being reversed before our eyes, a good thing, and it's not stopping here

Jesus Is The Lord

Don't get your hopes up for too long there, Truth.... ....and don't panic when things start to go the other way, either.

 

[Hank77]

Try telling that to the Colorado Christian cake baker (Jack Phillips) that was taken to court like 3-4 times over a 7 year period for refusing to bake cakes depicting same sex marriage

One time sued for refusing a same-sex marriage cake. Then sued by a trans lawyer for saying no to a transition celebration cake. He's been to court several times fighting these two lawsuits.
The trans lawyer in my opinion is a disgusting person period. He/she deliberately with after Phillips knowing that he would refuse. He/she was out to put him out of business completely not being happy that he had already given up 40% of his business by not making wedding cakes any longer. Despicable person!

 

[FireDragon76]

It hasn't put any "baby to bed." I wouldn't get that confident. The US legal system has a tendency to oscillate.

Not to mention justices have changed their minds before, especially as public consensus has shifted.

The long term trend in the US is not towards a resurgence of fundamentalist Christianity. In fact it's towards the weakening influence of religion in general. Culture wars today aren't even fought with religious language. That's because the majority of Americans aren't operating from a place of explicit religious ideologies or even religious belonging anymore.