Charles P. Pierce is a super writer who is smart and insightful, especially when he writes about education. He writes regularly for Esquire. In this post, he slices and dices the absurdity of the Carson vs. Makin ruling that compels Maine to pay tuition for students at evangelical Christian schools that openly discriminate against students, families, and teachers who do not share their religious views. The six justices in the majority are certainly not Originalists. Their decision overturns a key principle embedded in the Constitution, which prohibits the state from sponsoring or “establishing” religion.
He writes:
It’s been a big week for Christian nationalism in our politics. In the case of Carson v. Makin, which involved a Maine law that forbade public money to go to religious schools, the Supreme Court ruled that the Establishment Clause of the United States Constitution is…unconstitutional. The Court’s carefully engineered conservative majority has been heading in this direction, finding anti-religious—primarily anti-Christian—discrimination in laws deliberately written to be religiously neutral. This was a pole-vault over that line, and one that conceivably could threaten public education as a whole. Writing for the majority, Chief Justice John Roberts said:
This case concerns two families that live in SAUs that neither maintain their own secondary schools nor contract with any nearby secondary school. Petitioners David and Amy Carson reside in Glenburn, Maine. When this litigation commenced, the Carsons’ daughter attended high school at Bangor Christian Schools (BCS), which was founded in 1970 as a ministry of Bangor Baptist Church. The Carsons sent their daughter to BCS because of the school’s high academic standards and because the school’s Christian worldview aligns with their sincerely held religious beliefs.
Translation: the school discriminates against LGBTQ citizens. Here, from a brief filed in this case, is what Bangor Christian Schools are up to.
BCS believes that a student who is homosexual or identifies as a gender other than on his or her original birth certificate would not be able to sign the agreement governing codes of conduct that BCS requires as a condition of admission.
If a student was openly gay and regularly communicated that fact to his or her classmates, “that would fall under an immoral activity” under BCS’ Statement of Faith and if “there was no change in the student’s position” after counseling, the student would not be allowed to continue attending BCS.
BCS does not believe there is any way to separate the religious instruction from the academic instruction – religious instruction is “completely intertwined and there is no way for a student to succeed if he or she is resistant to the sectarian instruction.”
One of the objectives in the ninth-grade social studies class is to “[r]efute the teachings of the Islamic religion with the truth of God’s Word.”
Shrug, says John Roberts. Pay up, suckers.Me? I am planning to open a taxpayer-funded madrassa out in the woods somewhere. I’ll keep you advised.
Open the link. The post has an interesting take on Herschel Walker and on Arizona official Rusty Bower’s view that the Constitution was divinely inspired.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
To legislate what qualifies as an establishment of religion is to make a law respecting an establishment of religion, and that the legislative branch is forbidden to do.
LikeLike
well said, well argued, Jon
LikeLike
Originalism is a barely thinly disguised attempt to prevent the prevention of racism, sexism, not to mention disable the ability of government to regulate the behavior of business or provide any economic or social rights to anyone but the ultra-wealthy.
LikeLike
I demand that Originalist Amy Coney Barrett resign from SCOTUS. The Founders did not foresee giving women the vote or allowing them to serve in public office.
LikeLike
Some people try to read the establishment clause as merely forbidding an “established religion” (like the Anglican Church in England) but it’s really much broader than that and has from the “Origin” always been intended more broadly than that.
LikeLike
What Blow describes is essential to creating a kinder, gentler fascism. One that does not have detention camps, but makes laws and enforces existing ones in ways that does truly does create ghettos, or, to keep true to the theme, enclaves. Selective law enforcement doesn’t need legal justification to thrive, but it sure makes it tidier, administratively speaking.
LikeLike
Read “The Revenge of Power” by Moíses Naím, if you haven’t already. He writes about the 21stC [or post-modern/ post-1989] version of autocracy, which emerges from democracy by hollowing it out from within, while retaining the outward trappings of democracy. What you describe here is promulgated via “pseudoley” or false/ looks-like law, which has its basis in the capture of the courts.
LikeLike
Thank you for the recommendation, Ginny. And for the terminology. Much needed, for that is just what is happening. Hitler’s Germany was a nation of sick funhouse mirror “law.”
LikeLike
In the wake of the Trump years and Jan 6, support for unrestricted gun rights is effectively an attempt to enable insurrectionists who seek to undo democracy.
LikeLike
yup
LikeLike
Would this, then, brand the SCotUS majority enablers of domestic terrorists or would they be defined AS domestic terrorists?
LikeLike
Remember when the moron militia showed up at the Michigan state house? That is a little taste, I fear, of what is soon to come in the United States. Our version of the SA.
LikeLike
Unconstitutional Establishment Clause
The freedom to exercise
Shan’t be infringed
By clauses in legal guise
Hiding within
LikeLike
If the establishment clause is unconstitutional, does that mean we should start calling our founding document The US UNconstitution?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Presumably they will have to change the name of Old Ironsides as well.
LikeLike
Robert Hubbell’s last letter also has an update on Rusty Bowers.
https://roberthubbell.substack.com/p/its-better-that-we-found-out-now
LikeLike
Rusty Bower’s belief-
Man over woman. Christian over non-Christian, straight over gay and White over Black?
LikeLiked by 1 person
His reputation sure shot up like a rocket and immediately came down like a dud.
LikeLike
Deserved, although, it’s a shame. He could have avoided the obvious connection between his hypocrisy and sect that he represents when he boasts about his faith directing him to do the right thing.
Tuesday, during the hearing, one step forward for LDS. After the hearing, a giant step back for LDS.
LikeLike
In the LDS version of Brokeback Mountain, they really can’t quit the Idiot, no matter how much they claim to have a thing for Evan McMullen-types.
LikeLike
McMullin
LikeLike
LikeLike
Thanks for the video link. But, of more importance, thanks for being one of only two men at the blog who comments about politicians, political networks and religious sects who target women to keep them as 2nd class citizens.
Both Raffensperger and Bowers brandish their faith as their badge of entitlement.
LikeLike
Unconstitutional Constitution
It’s firmly established
By ruling Supremes
That document’s vanquished
Illegal, it seems.
LikeLike
It really is amazing how quickly more than 200 years of jurisprudence and precedent has been washed away by just a few opinions in one term. We have finally answered Benjamin Franklin’s question with a “Nope, no way, no how.” And we didn’t even need to wait for the midterms or the 2024 election.
LikeLike
My concern for this is primarily that, if this passes, then couldn’t parents simply take the money and home school their children? This is setting a very dangerous precedent.
LikeLiked by 1 person
dangerous precedent upon dangerous precedent: how long before we cannot even see our previous expectations
LikeLike
Dangerous precedent courtesy of a dangerous president.
(BTW, didn’t it45 spell what should have read “precedent” as “president?” (Or, visa versa?)
LikeLike
He meant to write “president.” But since he can’t spell, he wrote “precedent.”
LikeLike
I could be wrong, but I think that is already going on in some states. If not, it’s definitely on the docket of proposed laws in red states. And I’ll bet you they’re proposing a tax credit equivalent to the full per-pupil funding for each child [We’ve seen that in AZ as regards the “backpack” amount for each kid going to a charter].. Which is ludicrous, when you consider that parents of current K12 students are contributing a minority of the funds put in via REtaxes and state taxes by all citizens & corporations.
LikeLike
There are quite a few state commissioners of education (ie Frank Edelblut in New Hampshire) who support home schooling. He home schooled his own 10 children.
LikeLike
Adding a footnote to the post- religious schools discriminate against women.
I hope readers open the link. Pierce’s main point relates to the ramifications of the overturn of Roe v. Wade.
LikeLike
Religious schools discriminate against pretty much everyone who doesn’t follow their rules for living.
And the biggest irony is that many of the leaders of these religious groups don’t even follow their own rules.
LikeLike
“Arizona official Rusty Bower’s view that the Constitution was divinely inspired.”
Presumably why the Constitution is Unconstitutional.
God was not good at logic.
LikeLike
Rusty Bower reminds me of Trump when he hugged the flagpole, wrapping himself in the American flag.
LikeLike
“When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying a cross.”
Attributed to Sinclair Lewis but there’s tons of controversy about who is the real source for this prescient quotation.
LikeLike
When Fascism comes to America, America will be wrapped in a flag and hanging on a cross.
LikeLike
Poet,
strangled “by the flag”…
LikeLike
Linda
Most excellent modification
When Fascism comes to America, America will be strangled by the flag and hanging on a cross.
LikeLike
And the sad part is, we will have done to ourselves: Americide
LikeLike
I was very appreciative of Rusty Bowers testimony, but very disappointed that he said he would vote for Trump if he is the 2024 candidate, knowing that he is a liar who would cheat to win.
LikeLike
My preference is someone with the intellectual capacity to develop an ethical framework and the willingness to follow through.
As we’ve seen, those who are steered by divinely inspired decisions can be capricious.
LikeLike
Maine needs to develop regulations where money does not flow to organizations that discriminate that is independent of religion. It should be easy.
LikeLike
Or, god forbid, just establish public hischs in vast rural areas, as many other states have managed to do.
LikeLike
Ginny,
You are right. It is far better to fund school buses to rural areas than to pay for religious schools.
LikeLiked by 1 person
No one ever explains who there can be multiple private high schools in an area with no public high schools unless it is intentional. I thought one of the lesser discussed issues was that many political leaders used the law to fund their own chidlren’s private school bills.
LikeLike
Biden’s commission has studied the implications of changing the terms of Supreme Court justices. The members of the committee have been wary of packing the Court. According to the NYT their main suggestion was to implement term limits on Justices, and it is common practice in many democratic countries around the world
“By contrast, while the revisions flesh out a section explaining arguments against imposing term limits on the Supreme Court, the discussion materials also stress that the idea of staggered, 18-year terms — with a seat opening every two years — has enjoyed support from both liberal and conservative scholars.”
“Testimony taken by the commission, including comparing how states and other countries handle their judiciaries, showed that the American system in which federal Supreme Court justices serve for life — meaning they can cling to office into their geriatric years, and make the opening of seats via deaths erratic and unpredictable so that some presidents get many appointments in a term and some none — is highly unusual.the Supreme Court has been unwilling to implement any changes except perhaps term limits.”
Term limits could help to limit some of the damage from a right leaning Supreme Court.
LikeLike
I hope the proposal becomes law. Rhetorically, where does Manchin stand on the issue?
LikeLike
I don’t believe anything has gone to Congress yet. It’s not a great solution for the imbalance in the Court, but it may avoid the politicking that blocks the appointment of a sitting President’s nominee. Obama was cheated out of a legitimate appointment.
LikeLike
What is to prevent the Supreme Court from ruling term limits for Supreme Court justices unconstitutional?
After all, the Constitution makes no mention of term limits for justices and if the recent leaked preliminary abortion ruling is the pattern. if it ain’t specifically enumerated in the Constitution, it ain’t constitutional.
It’s really no stretch of the imagination to think they would rule term limits for themselves unconstitutional.
In fact, the real stretch is to think they would not.
LikeLike
All the blather about enumerated rights and “originalism” is just that: blather.
Nothing in the Constitution says that states must pay the bill for religious schools.
What would Thomas Jefferson say about the Carson decision?
He would be appalled at the thought that the Supreme Court is compelling the state of Maine to pay for religious schools.
LikeLike
Thanks, retired teacher, it’s good to get some research on this, and the reported results make sense. I’ve never leaned toward term limits in general [i.e., for elected offices] before. But 18 yrs seems like long enough for an appointed/ confirmed role like SCOTUS justice—as well as federal judge– to feel insulated against changing political whims.
LikeLike
preserving male dominon-
At Axios, “Latino evangelical leader sees major voter shift”
“Nearly one-half of all Latinos still identify as Catholic…most pro-life community of all ethnic groups”
The only significant voting group the Dems can feasibly grow (and, in the case of Latinas, try to keep) is women in conservative churches.
Women who aren’t in the traditional family structures are less likely to succumb to voting in line with a patriarchy which explains the crass move of the GOP to keep fathers in the home e.g. Hershel Walker’s hypocritical talking points.
LikeLike
https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/11/24/different-destinations-for-u-s-hispanics-latin-americans-who-leave-catholic-church/
LikeLike
Gates paid for a 2020 study at Georgetown Catholic University. The study found that the religious, the poor and STEM students are more inclined toward authoritarianism.
LikeLike
Remember the “president” standing in front of a church holding up a bible for a photo op? That was the image of this time. The correct caption would be one word: capitalizing.
Citizens United turned freedom of speech in the 1sr Amendment into the freedom —of money. Carson v Makin will further erode the 1st Amendment by causing the state to establish religion — with tax money. The 1st Amendment still guarantees freedom of assembly, as long as the — monied — president doesn’t order the assembly tear gassed. The 1st Amendment also grants the freedom of the press, the freedom of Rupert Murdoch and Elon Musk’s money. And you still have the right to petition to your heart’s content, but no one will hear if you don’t have money.
The 1st Amendment has been pirated and forced to walk the plank. Additionally, in the same era as Citizens United, Janus v AFSCME, and Carson v Makin, the 2nd Amendment has been taken hostage and is being forced to dance for the pirates. It’s a twisting dance. Citizens must fear their neighbors, and will go out and buy more arms — with money. The 4th Amendment is long ago looted. Don’t be surprised if the 3rd Amendment gets ambushed soon too. You might have soldiers quartered in your apartment before too long, the way things are going.
The country is upside down, and left is right and right is left because of the sickening rule of those with sickening money. It is the time of capitalizing.
LikeLike
Well, the Supremes just effectively declared the Constitution unconstitutional, so anything is possible.
LikeLike
nailed it, LCT
LikeLike
Originalists hell. Justice Roberts basically believes that the Establishment Clause was cook up by 19th century anti-catholics. The six radical members of the Supreme Court align more with the leaders of the Spanish Inquisition. Our Democracy is dying on the vine with Manchin and Sinema pulling it up by the roots in their refusal to end the filibuster that will end when Republicans get full control of Congress and the Whitehouse. Taps will then be in order.
LikeLike
While no one expected the Spanish Inquisition, this ruling was no surprise at all. What is interesting to me about the opinion are two things. First, those who thought that lack of legal decorum in Alito decision was one-off, this Thomas decision shows its the new standard. Second, the fact that they gave this decision to Thomas is as big a signal as one can get. He usually gets 9-0 or 8-1 cases that are fairly pedestrian when he gets a decision assigned to him. The Court is now led by its most ideological, incredibly stupid men.
LikeLike
Wrong, GregB, Carson v Makin decision was penned by Roberts. You’re thinking of this week’s other news in NYS Rifle & Pistol Assn v Bruen– apparently a slam-dunk case, since Thomas was allowed to write it. And definitely included some legally indecorous verbiage, i.e. barbed commentary on a previous decision.
LikeLike
When/if the Republicans gain control of the Senate, Democrats will wish they could filibuster.
It’s complicated.
LikeLike
“Under God” was not in the original version of the “Pledge of Allegiance.” It was added in 1954 in response to the Communist threat.
LikeLike
“One Nation under desks” would have been more apt as a response to the Communist nuclear threat.
LikeLike
LikeLike
Some Catholic schools preempted the 2022 SCOTUS Roe decision establishing theocracy. They already have students reciting an altered pledge of allegiance that includes church doctrine.
LikeLike
Two things. First one to annoy you (trying to be funny): https://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/248260/how-did-catholics-get-under-god-into-the-pledge-of-allegiance
LikeLike
Second. I had no idea what you were writing about. A quick Google search and there it was: https://handmaidsoftheimmaculate.weebly.com/blog/i-pledge-allegiance-to-the-cross
LikeLike
The U.S. pledge of allegiance recited at schools like Covington Catholic H.S. (where Nick Sandman definitely attended and, maybe Pat Cipillone), has a statement at the end, against abortion.
The NYT reported about it.
LikeLike
Just offering this, as the last half of linked article focuses on probable fallout from speculated SCOTUS overturn of Roe v Wade.
I used to angst over the abortion issue in the late ‘60’s, as a college kid who had recently converted to Catholicism [raised in a mixed household that attended both Prot & Cath services, I abided by my dad’s request to hold off on decision until 18yo]. Was abortion murder [meaning it should be illegal] or not? My interlocutor in these discussions was the bf who would become my 1st husband, who was studying polysci [pre-law]; he took the more liberal interpretation. I ended up deciding pro-choice, not for any logical/ legal reason, but mainly because I was aware of abortions that were going on among my friends, and saw how inequity factored in: the wealthy-enough were flown to someplace legal for a safe medical procedure, while the rest got back-alley or self-dealt w/hanger, often as not ending up with mortal or infertilizing results. And also because I understood that my church’s stance on this was different from that of some other Christian & non-Christian religions, so why would my church’s position be the basis of national law.
I became more easy with pro-choice over the years, having learned that (1)abortion was common and not even sanctioned in the US until the mid-19thC, and (2)abortion has always been acceptable for Jewish women who had good reason, and Jews do not consider life to begin at conception but rather at birth [backed by the Bible]. (b) helped especially, because I have always considered Judaism the closest to Catholicism in both ritual and culture.
Perhaps I am an originalist, unlike the SCOTUS faux-originalists who pick & choose “originalist” interpretation that suits their ideology/ political leanings. If the SCOTUS decision looks anything like Alito’s draft, it will be abandoning any pretense at originalist history pre-mid-19thC, choosing instead to balance recent 50 yrs’ SCOTUS precedent against 100 yrs’ varying laws contra, following 100 yrs’ no laws contra [the ‘originalist’ period].
LikeLike
I think Jews should carve out a religious exemption from abortion bans.
It would do wonders for membership.
LikeLiked by 1 person
A synagogue in Florida is suing the State on the grounds of violation
of religious freedom.
LikeLike
Good idea, Diane.
LikeLike
For legal purposes, the right wing divorces the issues of abortion and homosexuality from religion, a practice seen in media and among influencers, both conservative and liberal.
Btw- It’s pathetic that in 2022, in a developed nation, the reasoning put on display relies on the interpretation of men who use religion for the purpose of denying women status as equals.
LikeLike