In a 6-3 decision, the Supreme Court ruled that the government cannot suppress an individual from engaging in personal religious practices. The case erupted from an incident involving a high school football coach in Bremerton, Washington. Christian coach Joseph Kennedy would hold a group prayer in the middle of the field immediately after each game. The Bremerton school board grew increasingly concerned that Kennedy’s prayers would infringe on the Establishment Clause of the first amendment, which separated church and state. Kennedy refused to “play ball” with the school board when they asked him to pray somewhere else or at a later time. He continued to pray in the middle of the field and after each game. Consequently, the board put him on paid leave for violating the school’s policy and “endangering” students. After which, they did not renew his contract. Kennedy sued. The Supreme Court ruled that the school was in the wrong for firing Kennedy and that the First Amendment’s free speech and free exercise clauses protect individuals engaging in religious practices from government reprimand. The decision also overruled Lemon v. Kurtzman, the 1971 decision that established the three-part “Lemon test.” The test was used to determine whether or not a law or government entity violated the First Amendment’s Establishment Clause. All three of Trump’s appointed judges voted in favor of the Kennedy decision. 3. New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. v. Bruen
BIG WIN for religious liberty! Coach Joseph Kennedy was unfairly FIRED for privately praying during a high school football game. But just now, his RIGHT to pray was UPHELD. The Supreme Court delivers AGAIN! THANK YOU President Trump for nominating three FANTASTIC justices!!— Ronny Jackson (@RonnyJacksonTX) June 27, 2022
Decided on June 23, this case revolved around the 1911 Sullivan Act, a New York law that stated that applicants for a concealed carry pistol license had to show “proper cause,” or a specific need greater than that of the general public in their application if they hoped to be approved. The court ruled 6-3 that the law was unconstitutional according to the Second Amendment. Or, in their own words: “New York’s proper-cause requirement violates the Fourteenth Amendment by preventing law-abiding citizens with ordinary self-defense needs from exercising their Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms in public for self-defense.” Though the ruling only applied to New York, it will likely lead to closer scrutiny of other states with “may-issue” gun laws, states like California, Massachusetts, Maryland and Hawaii. “Shall-issue” laws are laws with more objective requirements for purchasing firearms, like passing background checks and meeting age requirements. “May-issue” laws are more discretionary, case-by-case, and are at the whims of local public service officials. All three of Trump’s appointed judges voted in favor of the decision. 4. Carson v. Makin
The Supreme Court just told New York in NY Pistol v. Bruen that it couldn’t undermine the Second Amendment rights of its citizens. This week, we’ve watched our Constitution in action, which is only possible when we have a #SCOTUS that adheres to it. Thank you, President Trump.— Vera Gebran for LD4 State House (@VoteVeraG) June 24, 2022
Decided on June 21, this decision was another having to do with freedom of religion and the separation of church and state and was centered on the state of Maine. Before the Supreme Court ruling, Maine did not allow school vouchers to pay for religious private schools, only secular ones. School vouchers are government-issued subsidies (financial support) that help parents pay tuition for their children’s private or religious schooling. The 6-3 court decision ruled that disallowing school vouchers for religious schools violated the First Amendment Free Exercise Clause, as doing so was discriminatory against religious schools. All three of Trump’s appointed judges voted in favor of the decision. 5. West Virginia v. EPA
I’m guessing #schoolchoice opponents are awfully nervous at this point.Once people get school choice it is very hard to take it from them. And with the COVID public school exodus, Carson v. Makin, universal ESAs in AZ, & more, a lot more families are primed to get it. — Neal McCluskey (@NealMcCluskey) June 27, 2022
Decided upon last Thursday, the case addressed the question of how much power the Environmental Protective Agency had in regulating carbon emissions. During the Obama administration, the EPA introduced the Clean Power Plan. The plan placed a cap on power plant emissions and called for power plants to reduce carbon emissions using carbon-reducing technology. The plan would have meant a mandatory nationwide transition away from staple fuel resources such as coal. “The ruling defanged much of the [EPA’s] coercive power to compel companies and local authorities into meeting President Joe Biden’s goal of halving greenhouse emissions by 2030 and reaching net-zero emissions by 2050,” The Western Journal reported. The Supreme Court ruled 6-3 that Congress does not allow EPA to place emission caps proposed by the Clean Power Plan. The power the EPA bestowed upon itself to enforce such a plan far exceeded its limits, as such a power belongs to congress. All three of Trump’s appointed judges voted in favor of the decision. Although the left may have removed The Donald from the oval office, the ghost of his appointive finger lives on, still wreaking havoc on the wily plots and schemes of the left, and all in a week’s work, too. This article appeared originally on The Western Journal.
YES YES YES! Thank you PRESIDENT TRUMP and SCOTUS. 6-3 against EPA vs West Virginia. Shove your Green New Deal!— Red In the Burgh (@ZupancicJareen) June 30, 2022