Reading the decision on appointments, it seemed appropriate, as these “recess” appointments are only temporary until the next Congress comes on, the issue isn’t quite what people think, but I would agree that Senate RULES need to be changed so that only if a quorum is available for a vote, are they actually “in session”. SCOTUS didn’t address this possibility.
“Hobby Lobby” is purely a violation of the Constitution in a further effort to make a quasi-official “national religion”. I’d be willing to bet that had Scalia et all been looking at either strict Jewish or Sharia law being the claimed “faith”, the decision would have been different. That is what Ginsberg was in part reflecting in her dissent, this RELIGIOUS decision was NOT just about contraception, and a big ugly door has already been proven open!
Reading the decision on appointments, it seemed appropriate, as these “recess” appointments are only temporary until the next Congress comes on, the issue isn’t quite what people think, but I would agree that Senate RULES need to be changed so that only if a quorum is available for a vote, are they actually “in session”. SCOTUS didn’t address this possibility.
“Hobby Lobby” is purely a violation of the Constitution in a further effort to make a quasi-official “national religion”. I’d be willing to bet that had Scalia et all been looking at either strict Jewish or Sharia law being the claimed “faith”, the decision would have been different. That is what Ginsberg was in part reflecting in her dissent, this RELIGIOUS decision was NOT just about contraception, and a big ugly door has already been proven open!