State-run Churches are O.K. with Clarence Thomas

U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas thinks it would be just fine for your state to officially sponsor its own church. Incredibly, in the recent decision regarding the pledge of allegiance, Justice Clarence Thomas, while acknowledging that the Constitution inconveniently prohibits Federal involvement in religion, says that individual states are fee to set up their own churches. Honestly, that's what the man said. The URL to the decision is at the bottom of this post, but here's the passage (the emphasis is added) beginning at page 52 of the decision:



"The Establishment Clause provides that 'Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion.' As a textual matter, this Clause probably prohibits Congress from establishing a national religion. But perhaps more importantly, the Clause made clear that Congress could not interfere with state establishments, notwithstanding any argument that could be made based on Congress' power under the Necessary and Proper Clause. Nothing in the text of the Clause suggests that it reaches any further. ... By contrast, the Free Exercise Clause plainly protects individuals against congressional interference with the right to exercise their religion, and the remaining Clauses within the First Amendment expressly disable Congress from 'abridging [particular] freedom[s].' This textual analysis is consistent with the prevailing view that the Constitution left religion to the States. ... History also supports this understanding: At the founding, at least six States had established religions. ... Quite simply, the Establishment Clause is best understood as a federalism provision - it protects state establishments from federal interference but does not protect any individual right."



Just think of the possibilities. My state could amend its constitution to allow County sponsored religions. No, wait, why not city sponsored churches? That way I could finally run my pesky neighbor out of town on religious grounds.



Here's a Los Angeles Times story on some Thomas' other wacky interpretations of our Constitution:

Los Angeles Times: Thomas' Take on the Law Rooted in 18th Century



And if you'd like to read the whole pledge opinion go to www.supremecourtus.gov. The Case is "Elk Grove Unified School Dist. v. Newdow."