Alito Would Change Church-State Law

Today's New York Times has published a story that says "Nominee is Said to Question Church-State Rulings." Here's a quote:

Mr. Cornyn, a former Texas attorney general, said he and Judge Alito had discussed the Supreme Court case Santa Fe Independent School District v. Doe, which Mr. Cornyn argued in 2000 and lost. The court ruled that the Constitution did not allow student-led prayer before a public high school football game.

"He did commiserate with me a little bit," Mr. Cornyn said. "I hope that he will be able to give the United States Supreme Court's ruling some coherence, because frankly they are way out of step with what the founding fathers intended."

Having lived near Santa Fe, Texas for twelve years, I know the aggressive and assertive form of Christianity that prevails in that community. Anyone who doubts that school prayers were emblematic of the hostile climate toward persons of minority faiths that exists in that school district should read the first footnote of the Supreme Court's decision on that case.

Here's the footnote:

A decision, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals noted, that many District officials "apparently neither agreed with nor particularly respected." 168 F. 3d 806, 809, n. 1 (CA5 1999). About a month after the complaint was filed, the District Court entered an order that provided, in part:

"[A]ny further attempt on the part of District or school administration, officials, counsellors, teachers, employees or servants of the School District, parents, students or anyone else, overtly or covertly to ferret out the identities of the Plaintiffs in this cause, by means of bogus petitions, questionnaires, individual interrogation, or downright `snooping', will cease immediately. ANYONE TAKING ANY ACTION ON SCHOOL PROPERTY, DURING SCHOOL HOURS, OR WITH SCHOOL RESOURCES OR APPROVAL FOR PURPOSES OF ATTEMPTING TO ELICIT THE NAMES OR IDENTITIES OF THE PLAINTIFFS IN THIS CAUSE OF ACTION, BY OR ON BEHALF OF ANY OF THESE INDIVIDUALS, WILL FACE THE HARSHEST POSSIBLE CONTEMPT SANCTIONS FROM THIS COURT, AND MAY ADDITIONALLY FACE CRIMINAL LIABILITY. The Court wants these proceedings addressed on their merits, and not on the basis of intimidation or harassment of the participants on either side." App. 34-35.

Here's a link to the entire decision: Santa Fe ISD vs. Doe

Technorati Tags Supreme Court, Samuel Alito, Church and State