Great news! Two Texas brothers just defeated one of the dumbest attacks on #ReligiousFreedom you will find: Their school banned them from all sports and clubs unless they cut sacred braids they’ve kept as a religious vow since birth. bit.ly/2VzqJHB 1/
In Cesar’s infancy, his parents made a religious vow never to cut a lock of his hair if he was healed from meningitis. He was healed, and he and his brother have kept the vow ever since. This kind of “promesa” has deep roots among Mexican Catholics. 2/
From K-6th grade, the Mathis TX school district let the boys keep their hair without any problems. But in 7th grade (2017) the district barred them from all interscholastic competition. Cesar was banned from football; Diego was taken off the Science Team. 3/
The school says long hair violates a “grooming” rule. But it offers no reason for the rule other than “it’s just been a community standard, the way...it’s always been.” Meanwhile, other Texas schools--and even prisons--allow religious long hair: bit.ly/2S6ivon 4/
In Sept 2019, a federal court ruled that forcing the boys to cut their braids would violate their religious freedom. fxn.ws/3eWzEe0. Obviously. The school should have quit then. But no--it kept digging. 5/
The school appealed, claiming that the court has “created a bastion of anarchy that will imminently devastate education.” (Yes, the school’s legal brief really said that.) 6/
While making this argument with a straight face--and saying these devout boys are too unkempt to represent the school--this is the school’s mascot: 7/
On appeal, the school didn’t try to defend its policy. Instead, it tried to get off on a technicality, saying the boys needed to give the school advance notice of their lawsuit by certified mail, rather than by fax. (Yes, that was the ONLY argument the school made on appeal) 8/
Yesterday, the Fifth Circuit rejected that argument, saying that Cesar didn’t need to provide further notice. Here's the opinion: s3.amazonaws.com/becketnewsite/… 9/
Although the court ruled Diego should have provided additional notice, it said that is “of little practical consequence,” because once the policy is struck down as to Cesar, Diego will “enjoy the benefits from that ruling” too. 10/
Now the ball is in the school district’s court. Will the Mathis ISD (mathisisd.org/index.aspx) keep fighting this foolish fight? Or will it do the right thing and respect these boys’ #ReligiousFreedom? 11/
Public schools should respect religious diversity. And these boys should be commended, not punished, for faithfully keeping a religious vow for over 15 years. /fin
Kudos to Jamie Aycock, Kenneth Young, and Kelsee Foote @Kirkland_Ellis and Texas attorney Frank Gonzales for taking on this case. @calebparke@FoxNews
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Key takeaways from the Little Sisters argument @ #SCOTUS today: 1. It was clear the gov’t has many ways to give out contraception. It doesn’t need to conscript nuns. So #ReligiousFreedom protects the Sisters.
2. The states haven’t identified a SINGLE woman ever denied coverage due to a religious exemption. As the Obama Admin admitted, they get coverage on family plans, on the exchange, or other gov’t programs. Zero harm.
3. The states' argument was exposed as startlingly broad. It not only attacked the exemption for the Sisters. It said the gov’t even lacked authority to exempt CHURCHES. Alito jumped on this; no Justice seemed to buy it.
@cityofpensacola The cross was erected by Pensacola citizens in 1941, just months before the US entered WWII. It has long been a gathering place for community events and it is a valued part of the city’s history and culture: becketlaw.org/case/kondratye… 2/
@cityofpensacola In 2016, an atheist group sued to remove the cross, saying it was offensive. (One plaintiff used the cross for his “Satanic rituals.” Another was recently sentenced to 15 days in prison for throwing a drink on a U.S. Congressman: pnj.com/story/news/201…) 3/
#BREAKING: A federal court has thrown out criminal convictions of four volunteers who left food and water in the desert for migrants at risk of death. The court said prosecuting them violated #RFRA--a major victory for #ReligiousFreedom! 1/ s3.amazonaws.com/becketnewsite/…
Fueled by faith, these volunteers traveled to the Cabeza Prieta National Wildlife Refuge, where migrant deaths are common, placing food & water along foot trails to prevent future deaths. 32 sets of human remains were recovered from this area in 2017 alone. 2/ credit: Google
Proving no good deed goes unpunished, the government criminally prosecuted the volunteers for entering the refuge & “abandoning property” (i.e., food & water) without a permit (even though no permit would allow them to leave food or water for migrants anyways). #Kafkaesque 3/
This is a bizarre case of progressives siding with the #Trump Administration and throwing Muslims and their civil rights under the bus--even when the supposed “benefit” for LGBT folks is nonexistent.
It's also wrong about who RFRA protects. Our empirical study of religious freedom cases shows that the groups getting the most benefit are non-Christian minorities, not Christians. Bleating "Hobby Lobby" doesn’t change that: 2/ papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cf…
Most obviously, on the specific RFRA issue #SCOTUS is reviewing ($ damages against federal officials), there have been 8 lower-court cases:
- 7 for Muslims
- 1 for a Hebrew-Israelite
- All but 1 were prisoners
- ZERO were Christians.
A 2016 HHS regulation, governing nearly every doctor nationwide, said doctors must perform gender-transition procedures, even on children, & even when the procedures could be harmful and were against the doctors’ conscience and medical judgment. transgendermandate.org 2/
HHS did this by issuing a regulation redefining “sex” to include “gender identity,” and saying doctors who don’t perform gender transition procedures would be punished for “sex” discrimination: govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR… 3/
BREAKING: a federal appeals court just upheld the constitutionality of tax-exempt housing allowances for ministers--sparing churches and ministers across the country almost $1 billion per year in new taxes.
3. Key quote from the court: “Myriad provisions in [the tax code]...allow hundreds of thousands of employees...to receive tax-exempt housing every year.” This “is simply one of many per se rules that provide a tax exemption to employees with work-related housing requirements.”