Connect with us

News

The Separation of Church and State Under Threat From Current Supreme Court

Published

on

The Supreme Court has agreed to hear a case that could allow local governments to display religious iconography on public property.

The case — a consolidation of American Legion v. American Humanist Association and Maryland-National Capital Park v. American Humanist Association  — revolves around a memorial to World War I soldiers. The memorial features a 40-foot tall cross, and was erected on public property in Bladenberg, Maryland.

A federal appeals court showed that the “Peace Cross” memorial violates the Constitution’s ban regarding “respecting an establishment of religion” under the First Amendment, but it is likely that the new Supreme Court, with a five person conservative majority, will reverse the lower court’s ruling.

The issue of religious imagery on public lands had appeared settled in the 1980s, after County of Allegheny v. ACLU. In that ruling, Justice Harry Blackmun wrote that the United States Constitution, “prohibits government from appearing to take a position on questions of religious belief or from ‘making adherence to a religion relevant in any way to a person’s standing in the political community.’”

This ruling did allow some leeway, including images of Muhammad or Moses, due to their connections with the law, but did not allow for other religious symbols.

This test has also been at the heart of fights over displays of the Ten Commandments and if such a display is that of a legal document or a religious one.

A Supreme Court reversal could lead to additional religious imagery at city halls, courthouse, schools and other institutions, and open the door to future challenges over school prayer and other changes sought by American evangelicals.

It will also signal future challenges with a religious bent, including potential “religious freedom” cases that can limit LGBTQ and other civil rights.

There's a reason 10,000 people subscribe to NCRM. You can get the news before it breaks just by subscribing, plus you can learn something new every day.
Continue Reading
Click to comment
 
 

Enjoy this piece?

… then let us make a small request. The New Civil Rights Movement depends on readers like you to meet our ongoing expenses and continue producing quality progressive journalism. Three Silicon Valley giants consume 70 percent of all online advertising dollars, so we need your help to continue doing what we do.

NCRM is independent. You won’t find mainstream media bias here. From unflinching coverage of religious extremism, to spotlighting efforts to roll back our rights, NCRM continues to speak truth to power. America needs independent voices like NCRM to be sure no one is forgotten.

Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Help ensure NCRM remains independent long into the future. Support progressive journalism with a one-time contribution to NCRM, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click here to donate by check.

News

MAGA Revolt Erupts as Trump’s Own Hawks Turn Against His Iran Deal

Published

on

President Donald Trump’s Iran war has divided his MAGA base more than any other issue since he came down the Trump Tower escalator to launch his first presidential campaign, Axios reports. Now, some of his top allies are turning against his Iran deal in a series of denunciations.

“The backlash has been particularly scathing from allies Trump spent months amplifying as validators of his Iran campaign,” Axios reports. The Iran deal has “opened an explosive second front in MAGA’s civil war, waged by hawkish allies who view U.S. concessions as an existential betrayal of Israel.”

The Hill notes that conservative “pundits and hawkish Iran experts are warning against any agreement that gives up key leverage against the Islamic Republic, or opens access to badly needed funds, without completely giving up its nuclear capacity.”

Fox News contributor Marc Thiessen wrote: “$300 billion to Iran under any circumstances is a disaster. Like offer[ing] the Marshall Plan to rebuild Germany while the Nazis were still in power.”

Conservative commentator Ben Shapiro told The Wall Street Journal: “If the president signed a bad deal, many of us who cheered and stood by him and thought that his action in Iran was heroic, will be extraordinarily disappointed.”

Many, including pro-Israel conservatives who backed Trump’s war, are now demanding to see the text of the “Memorandum of Understanding” (MOU) with Iran. They are frustrated with both the secrecy behind the deal — the MOU has yet to be officially released — and the reported leaked details.

Senior White House officials had said the text would be released Tuesday or Wednesday, while Trump said Friday — after it is officially signed in a ceremony in Geneva. Vice President JD Vance suggested that the text might be released before Friday, BBC News reported.

Trump’s own remarks have not quelled concern from his top allies, Axios noted.

“We’re dealing with people that I think are very rational people,” Trump said on Tuesday at the G7 summit. “They were nice to deal with.” He called them “strong people, smart people,” and added: “They’re not radicalized. They’re looking to help their country.”

“For hawks who view Iran’s government as a terrorist regime incapable of reform,” Axios reported, “the president’s language deepened their fear that the deal rewards Tehran for surviving the war.”

Vice President Vance may bear more of the ultimate backlash. He will sign the deal in Geneva, while Trump “can always pitch himself as the president who took on Iran when no one else dared.”

 

Image via Reuters 

Continue Reading

News

Susan Collins Doesn’t Regret Kavanaugh Vote After Roe Repeal: ‘Didn’t Impact Maine’

Published

on

Republican Sen. Susan Collins said she does not regret her tie-breaking vote to confirm Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh, even after the Supreme Court voted to reverse Roe v. Wade, ending the right to an abortion at the federal level. She said that the decision did not affect her state.

Speaking to reporter Randy Billings fo the Portland Press Herald, Collins said that she disagreed with the Roe decision, but pointed out that she also supported Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson, who all dissented from the decision.

“Obviously, I’m disappointed in that decision, which turned abortion issues back to the states. It has not had an impact on the state of Maine in that name actually expanded its law,” Collins said, according to WCSH-TV.

READ MORE: ‘She Knew What Brett Kavanaugh Was Going to Do’: Morning Joe Calls Out Susan Collins Over Abortion Ruling

In explaining her vote to confirm Kavanaugh, she said “When I look at a justice, I look at their qualifications, their integrity, their background, their experience in reaching a decision.” During Kavanaugh’s confirmation hearings, he dodged questions from senators on whether he would vote to overturn Roe v. Wade calling it “settled law.”

“One of the important things to keep in mind about Roe v. Wade is that it has been reaffirmed many times over the past 45 years, as you know, and most prominently, most importantly, reaffirmed in Planned Parenthood v. Casey in 1992,” Kavanaugh said at the time.

When pressed by Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) over a 2003 email he wrote where he said he was “not sure that all legal scholars refer to Roe as the settled law of the land at the Supreme Court level,” Kavanaugh said he was merely referring to the positions of such scholars.

“But the broader point was simply that I think it was overstating something about legal scholars. And I am always concerned with accuracy, and I thought that was not quite accurate description of legal, all legal scholars because it referred to ‘all,'” he said. “To your point, your broader point, Roe v. Wade is an important precedent of the Supreme Court. It has been reaffirmed many times… That makes Casey precedent on precedent. It has been relied on. Casey itself has been cited as authority in subsequent cases such as Glucksberg and other cases. So that precedent on precedent is quite important as you think about stare decisis in this context.”

Following the 2022 ruling that overturned Roe, Collins admitted that the decision was “completely inconsistent with what Justice Gorsuch and Justice Kavanaugh said in their hearings and in our meetings in my office.”

Kavanaugh’s confirmation hearing also hinged on accusations of sexual assault. Christine Blasey Ford testified before Congress that Kavanaugh had attempted to rape her while they were in high school, allegations Kavanaugh denies. During the hearings, sexual assault survivors met with Republican senators Collins and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, urging them not to confirm, according to Time magazine.

Murkowski ultimately was the lone Republican vote against confirming Kavanaugh.

Image via Shutterstock

Continue Reading

News

Josh Hawley Slams Baseball League for Punishing Players Over Anti-Pride Night Demonstration

Published

on

Senator Josh Hawley (R-MO) accused Major League Baseball of a “pattern of discrimination” after the league punished three players for their protest during a recent Pride Night celebration.

Hawley released the letter Tuesday afternoon following MLB issuing three San Francisco Giants pitchers for writing references to the Bible on their hats, a special Pride Night variant of the standard Giants hat featuring a rainbow version of the team logo.

“I write with grave concern over your reported decision to issue a formal warning to three Major League Baseball (MLB) players for publicly expressing their Christian faith. This follows a high-profile undercover investigation that revealed at least one MLB team discriminated against a player based on his Catholic faith. You must answer for what appears to be a pattern of discrimination within MLB against baseball players who profess their Christian faith,” Hawley wrote.

READ MORE: Baseball Commissioner Says Pride Jerseys Make Some Players ‘Uncomfortable’

Hawley was not the only Republican politician to condemn the MLB. Vice President JD Vance tweeted “Trump won we don’t have to do this anymore,” alongside a retweet of Sports Illustrated’s coverage of the warning. Rep. Nancy Mace from South Carolina wrote “So it’s okay when they’re forced into wearing pride hats for social propaganda, but Bible verses are an issue?” Mace made a name for herself attacking the first transgender representative Sarah McBride (D-DE), and recently came in fifth in her district’s primary election.

Pitcher Landen Roupp wrote Gen 9:12-16 on his cap next to the rainbow logo. Two relief pitchers, JT Brubaker and Ryan Walker, wrote similar references to the same Bible verse on their hats. The verse refers to the rainbow symbolizing the covenant between God and all creatures that he would not flood the earth again, however many anti-LGBTQ Christians have used the verse to accuse the queer community of co-opting the rainbow symbol.

MLB says that the warning came not over the content or meaning of the messages, but instead was a violation of the league’s rules about uniform integrity.

“To be clear, this routine verbal warning not to wear the hat in future games is not disciplinary and had absolutely nothing to do with the content of the message,” the league said in a follow. “We respect players’ right to free expression. However, writing of any kind, with any message, is prohibited per Major League Baseball’s uniform regulations which provides in part that, ‘(a) player may not write, attach, affix, embroider or otherwise display nicknames or messages on apparel or playing equipment,'” MLB said in a statement, according to the New York Times, adding that similar warnings had been issued to players who wrote the names of family members on uniforms.

Another relief pitcher, Sam Hentges, wore the standard version of the Giants hat. He did not receive any warning from MLB.

The Giants have a long history of supporting the LGBTQ community. It was the first team to wear rainbow versions of its logo during Pride games. It was also the first team to raise money for HIV/AIDS research in 1994.

The team apologized for the pitchers’ protest, sending a statement to the San Francisco Standard, that  it was “proud to support Pride Night and the LGBTQ+ community.”

“Baseball should be a place where everyone feels welcome, respected, and valued. We also respect that individuals may make personal choices about participating in team activations. We understand that the choices by individual players have caused pain and anger to many in the LGBTQ+ community and we are sorry for that.  Those choices do not change our organization’s commitment to inclusion, belonging, and creating a welcoming environment for all. We remain grateful to our fans, partners, employees, players, and coaches who help make Pride Night a meaningful celebration.”

Image via Shutterstock

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2026 AlterNet Media.