First, there’s having to reckon with their own flip-flop. That’s just embarrassing.
“I would definitely oppose after-school Satanic clubs, but they have a First Amendment right to meet,” said Mat Staver, Liberty Counsel’s founder and chairman.
“The so-called Satanic Temple group is a handful of atheists masquerading as so-called Satanists. This group is not legitimate. Its only reason to exist is to oppose the Good News Clubs.
Then there’s the little problem of Justice Ginsburg’s dissenting opinion in Burwell v. Hobby Lobby, which, as I’ve always read it, was a defense of the court against the ambitions of a well-intended, if cynical left, else why say it in the context of the dissent?
In her powerful dissent, Justice Ginsburg proclaimed an “overriding interest” in “keeping the courts ‘out of the business of evaluating’ . . . the sincerity with which an asserted religious belief is held.”
And then there’s the Justice batting for their team, Justice Alito, with another inconvenient opinion,
The reasonableness of a religious belief is something “the federal courts have no business addressing,” Justice Alito said.
Of course, Justice Ginsburg’s opinion doesn’t carry the weight of law…just yet. But should Liberty Counsel be full enough of its own counsel to push this through the courts, I believe they’ll force a consistency out of the courts that works against them and the causes they serve. Imagine the combination of no tests for either sincerity or reasonableness.
Mind you, I’m no attorney, and I’m new-ish to the field. Maybe that combination already exists, in which case, I’d expect Liberty Counsel to be fully aware of that, and this translates into just media posturing so they can play the persecuted card. But this doesn’t scan like that for me.