41
Fact: The only criticisms of ACB that are ever offered are a) she has adopted Haitian children, and b) she is Catholic. Critics falsely allege that she is "soft on immigration," despite strongly ruling otherwise, and that she will "take orders from the pope," despite the No Religious Test clause.
posted ago by QuranIsToiletPaper ago by QuranIsToiletPaper +41 / -0
19 comments
19 comments share save hide report block hide child comments
Comments (19)
sorted by:
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
▲ 6 ▼
– Raetchel 6 points ago +7 / -1

She ruled for the lockdowns which is against 1st amendment; therefore, DISQUALIFIED.

permalink save report block reply
▲ -4 ▼
– deleted -4 points ago +1 / -5
▲ 3 ▼
– dems_be_crazy 3 points ago +3 / -0

No, she didn't. The argument was that political speech (Republicans gathering) carried as much weight as religious speech (much looser rules in lockdown EO). So, the court ruled it does not.

Yes, one outcome, had they won, could be that the more favorable rules would be removed.

However, the ability of the government to limit free speech and association (political, religious or otherwise) is not constitutional, itself. There is no carve out in the constitution for emergencies or pandemics.

permalink parent save report block reply