SCOTUS

[Seacoaster(1)]

Good grief, Cranky READ THE FORKIN ARTICLE and get back to us with something approaching cogent commentary. You're flapping your gums here in an extraordinarily uninformed way. This author is actually TRYING to give Brett Kegenough? some credit here...

..

Here, spoonfeeding:

"Not every member of the football team shared their coach’s Christian faith. But virtually all of them felt compelled to participate. Team members later explained that praying with Kennedy was “expected.” The coach even encouraged his own players to recruit their opponents and their coaches into the prayer circle. Some students joined in only because they feared they “wouldn’t get to play as much” if they declined, or because “they did not wish to separate themselves from the team.”

These are exactly the issues that the Founders feared, whatever the context: state actors letting people subordinate to them know that there is a correct religion, and an incorrect one, or worse probably, irreligion. Pilgrims, Puritans and Anne Hutchinson anyone?

More, from Amy Howe (both on her blog and on Scotusblog):

Arguing for the school district, lawyer Richard Katskee told the justices that the problem was not Kennedy’s quiet prayer by himself. Instead, Katskee explained, the issue was that Kennedy “insisted on audible prayers at the 50-yard line with students,” because he believed that the prayers “are how he helps these kids be better people.” Kennedy’s actions, Katskee continued, put pressure on players to join the prayers, “divided the coaching staff, sparked vitriol against school officials, and led to the field being stormed and students getting knocked down.”

https://www.scotusblog.com/2022/04/high ... -justices/

This personal belief cannot take the form of state action.

Clement, whose advocacy I generally both admire (notwithstanding his representation of Huguely) and disagree with, says incredibly the facts aren't clear (Clement’s response prompted Kagan to ask whether the main question in the case before the justices is what the correct version of the facts is. Clement answered that it is “one of the questions in this case,” ) while Alito unsurprisingly says the facts may not matter (because he knows how he'll decide the case).

This is a low risk opportunity for Kavanaugh to fend off the cynics by following his line of questioning in his decision.

Agree with everything you say here. I was really surprised reading about Clement's characterization of the record; most appellate judges I have been before would have chapped my a** something terrible for mischaracterizihng the record, and most opposing counsel would do the same. At the trial level, it sure looks like the School District developed a good and thorough record of the prayer and prostelytizing.

[AOD]

Agree with everything you say here. I was really surprised reading about Clement's characterization of the record; most appellate judges I have been before would have chapped my a** something terrible for mischaracterizihng the record, and most opposing counsel would do the same. At the trial level, it sure looks like the School District developed a good and thorough record of the prayer and prostelytizing.

Agreed. And the "music to my ears" comment struck me as far too familiar for the venue.

The base case here is the discipline of a school employee. Anyone involved in this type of case knows that mountains of paperwork are created before any form of discipline can be imposed. I expect the dissent (although I hope it's the majority) will note the "liberties" Clement took with the facts established on the record.

[cradleandshoot]

Good grief, Cranky READ THE FORKIN ARTICLE and get back to us with something approaching cogent commentary. You're flapping your gums here in an extraordinarily uninformed way. This author is actually TRYING to give Brett Kegenough? some credit here...

..

Here, spoonfeeding:

"Not every member of the football team shared their coach’s Christian faith. But virtually all of them felt compelled to participate. Team members later explained that praying with Kennedy was “expected.” The coach even encouraged his own players to recruit their opponents and their coaches into the prayer circle. Some students joined in only because they feared they “wouldn’t get to play as much” if they declined, or because “they did not wish to separate themselves from the team.”

These are exactly the issues that the Founders feared, whatever the context: state actors letting people subordinate to them know that there is a correct religion, and an incorrect one, or worse probably, irreligion. Pilgrims, Puritans and Anne Hutchinson anyone?

... this stuff is only hard if it is your intention to make it hard

You should take your own advice doc. Your making mountains out of molehills. I'm being led to believe the coach was praying at the 50 yard line while taking attendence as to who was joining him in prayer. You folks are ASSUMING these players were being forced or persuaded into praying. I don't read one iota of evidence that coached forced any of his players to do anything they did not want to do. Neither have I read any proof the coach somehow retaliated against any player that chose to not join in any prayer session.

[AOD]

Good grief, Cranky READ THE FORKIN ARTICLE and get back to us with something approaching cogent commentary. You're flapping your gums here in an extraordinarily uninformed way. This author is actually TRYING to give Brett Kegenough? some credit here...

..

Here, spoonfeeding:

"Not every member of the football team shared their coach’s Christian faith. But virtually all of them felt compelled to participate. Team members later explained that praying with Kennedy was “expected.” The coach even encouraged his own players to recruit their opponents and their coaches into the prayer circle. Some students joined in only because they feared they “wouldn’t get to play as much” if they declined, or because “they did not wish to separate themselves from the team.”

These are exactly the issues that the Founders feared, whatever the context: state actors letting people subordinate to them know that there is a correct religion, and an incorrect one, or worse probably, irreligion. Pilgrims, Puritans and Anne Hutchinson anyone?

... this stuff is only hard if it is your intention to make it hard

You should take your own advice doc. Your making mountains out of molehills. I'm being led to believe the coach was praying at the 50 yard line while taking attendence as to who was joining him in prayer. You folks are ASSUMING these players were being forced or persuaded into praying. I don't read one iota of evidence that coached forced any of his players to do anything they did not want to do. Neither have I read any proof the coach somehow retaliated against any player that chose to not join in any prayer session.

From the Slate article cited by dis:

Not every member of the football team shared their coach’s Christian faith. But virtually all of them felt compelled to participate. Team members later explained that praying with Kennedy was “expected.” The coach even encouraged his own players to recruit their opponents and their coaches into the prayer circle. Some students joined in only because they feared they “wouldn’t get to play as much” if they declined, or because “they did not wish to separate themselves from the team.”

One member of the football team during Kennedy’s tenure, who came forward under a pseudonym for fear of retaliation, attested that he refused to bow his head because Kennedy’s prayers did not align with his own beliefs. He was then “persecuted” for failing to conform, treated poorly by the coaches and permitted to play only because of his talent on the field. The experience still haunts him, as well as others who felt queasy about the indoctrination they faced at school. These players, the student said, “would rather forget about that time of their life.”

[ggait]

This is a classic line drawing case.

Line-drawing cases always depend upon the specific facts.

Was this a state university (non compulsory attendance, older students) vs. elementary or high school?
Was the prayer during classes (compulsory attendance) or optional after school activities?
Was the prayer being initiated by students or school employees?
Was the prayer personal, private, spontaneous?
Did the prayer have a coercive or proseletizing aspect to it?

The football coach is obviously going to win, given the current court make up. From the summaries I saw, I think he should lose.

Sounds like he started off doing it as a low key personal thing that no one objected to. But then he started amping it up as other started joining in. Then once an opposing coach raised the issue, the situation (as it often does) and the coach further amped up and doubled down. Including lots of press and protesters in support/opposition to the post game prayers.

The player/students have more leeway on this than a coach/employee does.

Clearly the coach can bless himself and look skyward from the sidelines as his place kicker lines up for a potential game winning kick. He can certainly thank god in a post-game interviewer. He can do his after game prayers in his office, his car or maybe in the locker room.

Much less clear that he can hold a 50 yard line prayer service after each game attended by pretty much his entire team as well as many others. The big public display of that time/place/manner obviously introduces questions of endorsement, proseletizing and coercion.

All rights have limits. I have a right to swing my arms, but that right ends when my fist approaches your jaw.

[cradleandshoot]

Good grief, Cranky READ THE FORKIN ARTICLE and get back to us with something approaching cogent commentary. You're flapping your gums here in an extraordinarily uninformed way. This author is actually TRYING to give Brett Kegenough? some credit here...

..

Here, spoonfeeding:

"Not every member of the football team shared their coach’s Christian faith. But virtually all of them felt compelled to participate. Team members later explained that praying with Kennedy was “expected.” The coach even encouraged his own players to recruit their opponents and their coaches into the prayer circle. Some students joined in only because they feared they “wouldn’t get to play as much” if they declined, or because “they did not wish to separate themselves from the team.”

These are exactly the issues that the Founders feared, whatever the context: state actors letting people subordinate to them know that there is a correct religion, and an incorrect one, or worse probably, irreligion. Pilgrims, Puritans and Anne Hutchinson anyone?

... this stuff is only hard if it is your intention to make it hard

You should take your own advice doc. Your making mountains out of molehills. I'm being led to believe the coach was praying at the 50 yard line while taking attendence as to who was joining him in prayer. You folks are ASSUMING these players were being forced or persuaded into praying. I don't read one iota of evidence that coached forced any of his players to do anything they did not want to do. Neither have I read any proof the coach somehow retaliated against any player that chose to not join in any prayer session.

From the Slate article cited by dis:

Not every member of the football team shared their coach’s Christian faith. But virtually all of them felt compelled to participate. Team members later explained that praying with Kennedy was “expected.” The coach even encouraged his own players to recruit their opponents and their coaches into the prayer circle. Some students joined in only because they feared they “wouldn’t get to play as much” if they declined, or because “they did not wish to separate themselves from the team.”

One member of the football team during Kennedy’s tenure, who came forward under a pseudonym for fear of retaliation, attested that he refused to bow his head because Kennedy’s prayers did not align with his own beliefs. He was then “persecuted” for failing to conform, treated poorly by the coaches and permitted to play only because of his talent on the field. The experience still haunts him, as well as others who felt queasy about the indoctrination they faced at school. These players, the student said, “would rather forget about that time of their life.”

A Slate article posted by Dis. You wonder where my scepticism comes from??? Anyhow a distant memory of when my oldest son played football for Penfield. His coach, Chris Battaglia who moved on to coach at Aquinas Institute in Rochester, had a post game tradition. Win or loss the team met in the middle of the field. Coach Taggs would say what he had to say to his team in private among his players. I asked my son once what Coach Taggs had to say after the game. My son told me that was between us and Coach. IMO, that is an awesome concept. The players could do or say whatever they wanted without being judged by their coach. FTR, this entire conversation became nonsensical when NONE of you questioned if it is not more important to a coach if his kids are not drinking or doing drugs. Are his players maintaining good grades? Are they abiding by the coaches curfew rule?? Are they showing up to practice on time? I could go on and on and on. I can make this very clear. IMO no coach should EVER demand his players pray with him. The fact "SOME PLAYERS" including one anonymous player ( must have been afraid for his life) feel differently is not very persuasive. How many athletes play football for this team?? Since "some" is the unknown factor. FTR, did the coach ever DEMAND his players pray??? If he didn't is encouraging them to join him a bad thing??

[Seacoaster(1)]

Do you read anything anyone posts?

[cradleandshoot]

Do you read anything anyone posts?

That depends on how long the posts are. I made my point very clear counselor. Do you ever brush up on your reading comprehension? Not to be disrespectful to Mr Dis or Salon but Mr Dis is an unapologetic FLP ideologue whose opinions are slanted and biased so far to the left to not make them believable. I have no problem with that because Mr Dis has always been upfront and honest about where he comes from. I have a question for you counselor. How many players on the football team claim they were intimidated into praying?? The only thing claimed is that "some players" felt obligated to do what the coach wanted. How many players are "some"? You have a number for us?? Some could be one or two or ten or twenty. One student is so scared he wants to remain anonymous...

[MDlaxfan76]

Do you read anything anyone posts?

no, he simply spots off longwinded screeds without doing bothering to do his homework. Nothing wrong with having an opinion, but popping off at others without even bothering to read what anyone else has said...well, we can picture a cranky old guy in his basement who would be better off out tilling the garden or walking the dog...spring needs to come soon for him...

cradle, here's the brief from the school:https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/ ... 0FINAL.pdf

[Seacoaster(1)]

Do you read anything anyone posts?

That depends on how long the posts are. I made my point very clear counselor. Do you ever brush up on your reading comprehension? Not to be disrespectful to Mr Dis or Salon but Mr Dis is an unapologetic FLP ideologue whose opinions are slanted and biased so far to the left to not make them believable. I have no problem with that because Mr Dis has always been upfront and honest about where he comes from. I have a question for you counselor. How many players on the football team claim they were intimidated into praying?? The only thing claimed is that "some players" felt obligated to do what the coach wanted. How many players are "some"? You have a number for us?? Some could be one or two or ten or twenty. One student is so scared he wants to remain anonymous...

To answer you’re question about the number, I’d probably have to review the briefs and record on appeal. I’ll do that later if I find time.

But is it OK for a publicly employed authority figure to coerce even one young man, even inadvertently, into participating in a religious exercise? To use the power — the awesome power of an on-field father figure for a lot of kids — of his beliefs to force conformity to them from 16 and 17 year olds? Would it be different if the coach went to the middle of the field, faced east, went to his knees and placed his face on the ground and said “inshallah”?

[Seacoaster(1)]

Do you read anything anyone posts?

no, he simply spots off longwinded screeds without doing bothering to do his homework. Nothing wrong with having an opinion, but popping off at others without even bothering to read what anyone else has said...well, we can picture a cranky old guy in his basement who would be better off out tilling the garden or walking the dog...spring needs to come soon for him...

cradle, here's the brief from the school:https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/ ... 0FINAL.pdf

Thanks MDLaxFan. C&S, read pages 3 through 13, which summarizes the factual record. You will see that this is performative religion, where everyone is made to watch the spectacle and where younger people are forced to decide to be in, or be out.

[cradleandshoot]

Do you read anything anyone posts?

That depends on how long the posts are. I made my point very clear counselor. Do you ever brush up on your reading comprehension? Not to be disrespectful to Mr Dis or Salon but Mr Dis is an unapologetic FLP ideologue whose opinions are slanted and biased so far to the left to not make them believable. I have no problem with that because Mr Dis has always been upfront and honest about where he comes from. I have a question for you counselor. How many players on the football team claim they were intimidated into praying?? The only thing claimed is that "some players" felt obligated to do what the coach wanted. How many players are "some"? You have a number for us?? Some could be one or two or ten or twenty. One student is so scared he wants to remain anonymous...

To answer you’re question about the number, I’d probably have to review the briefs and record on appeal. I’ll do that later if I find time.

But is it OK for a publicly employed authority figure to coerce even one young man, even inadvertently, into participating in a religious exercise? To use the power — the awesome power of an on-field father figure for a lot of kids — of his beliefs to force conformity to them from 16 and 17 year olds? Would it be different if the coach went to the middle of the field, faced east, went to his knees and placed his face on the ground and said “inshallah”?

I'm not disagreeing with you. No coach should ever force his players to pray. I don't know if that is the case here. Apparently some players felt pressured by the coach. To the best of my understanding this little prayer session was voluntary to any player who wished to join in. If the coach was using his religious beliefs to create a sense of duress among his players to pray, that is 100% wrong all day long. If it was voluntary with no bias against any of his players who chose not to participate, I'm fine with that. IMO I wonder why this coach did not choose to coach at a private Christian or Catholic school where is religious beliefs would be an integral part of the program.

[Typical Lax Dad]

Do you read anything anyone posts?

That depends on how long the posts are. I made my point very clear counselor. Do you ever brush up on your reading comprehension? Not to be disrespectful to Mr Dis or Salon but Mr Dis is an unapologetic FLP ideologue whose opinions are slanted and biased so far to the left to not make them believable. I have no problem with that because Mr Dis has always been upfront and honest about where he comes from. I have a question for you counselor. How many players on the football team claim they were intimidated into praying?? The only thing claimed is that "some players" felt obligated to do what the coach wanted. How many players are "some"? You have a number for us?? Some could be one or two or ten or twenty. One student is so scared he wants to remain anonymous...

To answer you’re question about the number, I’d probably have to review the briefs and record on appeal. I’ll do that later if I find time.

But is it OK for a publicly employed authority figure to coerce even one young man, even inadvertently, into participating in a religious exercise? To use the power — the awesome power of an on-field father figure for a lot of kids — of his beliefs to force conformity to them from 16 and 17 year olds? Would it be different if the coach went to the middle of the field, faced east, went to his knees and placed his face on the ground and said “inshallah”?

I'm not disagreeing with you. No coach should ever force his players to pray. I don't know if that is the case here. Apparently some players felt pressured by the coach. To the best of my understanding this little prayer session was voluntary to any player who wished to join in. If the coach was using his religious beliefs to create a sense of duress among his players to pray, that is 100% wrong all day long. If it was voluntary with no bias against any of his players who chose not to participate, I'm fine with that. IMO I wonder why this coach did not choose to coach at a private Christian or Catholic school where is religious beliefs would be an integral part of the program.

My son’s high school team said a little prayer before every game. Guess who wasn’t in the huddle? It was player driven. Not driven by some stupid ball coach with nothing better to do….. particularly after being told not to do it.

[JoeMauer89]

Do you read anything anyone posts?

no, he simply spots off longwinded screeds without doing bothering to do his homework. Nothing wrong with having an opinion, but popping off at others without even bothering to read what anyone else has said...well, we can picture a cranky old guy in his basement who would be better off out tilling the garden or walking the dog...spring needs to come soon for him...

cradle, here's the brief from the school:https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/ ... 0FINAL.pdf

And you are free of any faults??, Can't you see exactly what you are doing here? So quick to dismiss and trivialize someone whose opinions are in opposition to your own narrow ideologies. You just must not be able to help yourself.

Joe

[Seacoaster(1)]

Do you read anything anyone posts?

no, he simply spots off longwinded screeds without doing bothering to do his homework. Nothing wrong with having an opinion, but popping off at others without even bothering to read what anyone else has said...well, we can picture a cranky old guy in his basement who would be better off out tilling the garden or walking the dog...spring needs to come soon for him...

cradle, here's the brief from the school:https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/ ... 0FINAL.pdf

And you are free of any faults??, Can't you see exactly what you are doing here? So quick to dismiss and trivialize someone whose opinions are in opposition to your own narrow ideologies. You just must not be able to help yourself.

Joe

There you go again. It's like your stalking MDLaxFan. "Narrow ideologies"? What on earth are you talking about? And why this bizarre need to jump into conversations and on top of other posters. Just really odd.

The point he makes in his response to C&S is completely valid.

[JoeMauer89]

Do you read anything anyone posts?

no, he simply spots off longwinded screeds without doing bothering to do his homework. Nothing wrong with having an opinion, but popping off at others without even bothering to read what anyone else has said...well, we can picture a cranky old guy in his basement who would be better off out tilling the garden or walking the dog...spring needs to come soon for him...

cradle, here's the brief from the school:https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/ ... 0FINAL.pdf

And you are free of any faults??, Can't you see exactly what you are doing here? So quick to dismiss and trivialize someone whose opinions are in opposition to your own narrow ideologies. You just must not be able to help yourself.

Joe

There you go again. It's like your stalking MDLaxFan. "Narrow ideologies"? What on earth are you talking about? And why this bizarre need to jump into conversations and on top of other posters. Just really odd.

The point he makes in his response to C&S is completely valid.

It's not valid at all, that's the point. You see it that way because you both only see things with blinders on. I'm not "jumping in" I'm responding to a post he made about C&S. I would not describe him as someone who lacks reading comprehension, or doesn't read. But I'm beginning to think that you and MD just ascribe to the, "read it and discount the parts of it that discount my political ideology" You do it constantly, and I'll continue to challenge it as I see fit. You are trivializing others viewpoints, that is the most hurtful thing someone can do. I don't care what your opinion IS, I care that you are so darn dismissive of the other viewpoint, 99.9% of the time. That is not what discussion is, plain and simple.

Joe

[dislaxxic]

Nope, that's just flat wrong Joe. Read the series of posts Cradle made on this establishment court case and it's as obvious as the nose on your lecturing, baffling (repeated) interjections defending Cradle's un-informed ramblings... that it's almost as astonishing as cradle's off-base, knee jerk reactions to the story. They really aren't "opinions" they're just trolling, frankly. Cranky CLEARLY hadn't read the article. It's all there in black and white...there's absolutely NO disputing it. Defend specific points of his "point of view" on the objective information in the story. You can't.

..

[JoeMauer89]

Nope, that's just flat wrong Joe. Read the series of posts Cradle made on this establishment court case and it's as obvious as the nose on your lecturing, baffling (repeated) interjections defending Cradle's un-informed ramblings... that it's almost as astonishing as cradle's off-base, knee jerk reactions to the story. They really aren't "opinions" they're just trolling, frankly. Cranky CLEARLY hadn't read the article. It's all there in black and white...there's absolutely NO disputing it. Defend specific points of his "point of view" on the objective information in the story. You can't.

..

Why is it trolling? Trolling is doing something purposefully to incite a reaction. You really think that's C&S intention, he has proven time and time again that's far from his Modus Operandi. Trolling is not defined as, "I don't like that particular opinion and don't want to hear it because it runs contrary to the FLP narrative that I subscribe to, so I will mischaracterize it, trivialize, belittle it and do all that I can to delegitimize it"

Joe

[cradleandshoot]

Do you read anything anyone posts?

no, he simply spots off longwinded screeds without doing bothering to do his homework. Nothing wrong with having an opinion, but popping off at others without even bothering to read what anyone else has said...well, we can picture a cranky old guy in his basement who would be better off out tilling the garden or walking the dog...spring needs to come soon for him...

cradle, here's the brief from the school:https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/ ... 0FINAL.pdf

What you talking about Willis?? You want to criticize me for being long-winded?? Pot meet kettle. I can spout off in 2 paragraphs. You could never condense your spouting to that level on your best day. Too cold to rototill the garden. This weekend is suppose to be sunny and mild. I may grab a couple of bundles of peat moss and till it in. Roxy is my sweetheart. She has a history that even a cold hearted orb like yourself would respect. She was abused/neglected and spent the 1st 2 years of her life being barepawed and pregnant. When she came to rescued treasures she was scared and pregnant.She gave birth to 8 pups, 1 did not make it. Two weeks later her foster parents took in 8 abandoned puppies. My little Roxy nursed those pups as if they were her own. So when you make fun of me about her, remember this.. if more humans possessed the capacity for love and unselfishness that she does, the world would be a much better place. As I write this she is staring up at me pawing at my leg. Time for our stroll. You can go back to spewing your anger and hatred towards trump and your party. This old guy has more important things to do...

[jhu72]

C&S is all over the place. He claims he is not disagreeing and then goes on to disagree. If this were an actual discussion, people would say he just likes hearing the sound of his own voice.