Monday, June 25, 2007
Supreme Court Decisions
In the Supreme Court cases:
One of the decisions made recently was about faith-based and community initiatives. They decided that those who are agnostic and atheist cannot challenge the White House in their putting part of taxpayers money into faith-based programs. Those agencies and groups are allowed to have a share of the federal money. Freedom From Religion Foundation Inc., a taxpayer group, didn't like government conferences where the administration officials encouraged religious charities to apply for federal grants. I do believe that charities should get a cut of the federal pie if they want it whether they are faith-based or whatever other since it is supposed to be for all charities.
Then in another decision, split again 5-4, the Supreme Court tightened student speech limits. While students do not give up their free speech rights at the school property line, there are limits to what a student may say in word or action. This suit was about a student who had a 14 ft. banner proclaiming "Bong Hits 4 Jesus" which is, by the way, offensive to me personally since it implies that my Savior is appearing to agree with the drugs. "Schools may prohibit student expression that can be interpreted as advocating drug use," Chief Justice John Roberts wrote in the 5-4 ruling against the student who brought the lawsuit.
Then, the Supreme Court loosened restrictions on campaign ads before an election. Specifically, corporate and union funded television ads. According to some folks, this weakens the key provision of a landmark campaign finance law. Again splitting 5-4, the court upheld a lower court decision about an anti-abortion (their words, not mine. Mine would have been "pro-life") group who should have been allowed to air ads in the last couple of months of the elections of 2004. This particular suit involves Wisconsin Right To Life who were unable to have ads asking voters to contact their two senators urging them not to filibuster judicial nominees up for appointments at the time. One of the senators was up for election at the time the ads would have aired.
I agree with each of these decisions although with caution in at least one case. Grats to the Supreme Court!!
Categories: My Take on Things