There was another important 5-4 ruling yesterday in the case of Harris v. Quinn, where the US Supreme Court dealt a blow to unions by saying that public employees cannot routinely be required to join labor unions or to support them by paying dues. (You can read more on that case here and here and here.)
The majority opinion, like the Hobby Lobby one, said that the ruling only applied to the limited case of ‘partial public employees’ and not to ‘full-fledged’ ones but this and other recent decisions by the US Supreme Court seem to reveal a pattern by the conservative members on how to push the conservative agenda. Rather than making sweeping rulings, in cases like the Greece prayer case, the Hobby Lobby contraception case, the Harris v. Quinn union case, and earlier campaign finance cases, what they do is look as though they are ruling narrowly on the specifics of the case but using those rulings as wedges to invite more challenges that can push the envelope even further.
Meanwhile Lyle Denniston and Amy Howe provide further analysis of the Hobby Lobby contraception case.
Not to the right Mano -- back to the past. The nineteenth-century past.
That’s what he said right back to the past. 😛
Actually I thought that was continental drift and plate tectonics that was doing that!
Oh you mean politically? Well, yeah, that’s right then.