My first impression after looking a bit into the coach and the Maine cases is that the SCOTUS rulings weren’t as broad as I first feared.
As mentioned here above, already, what might matter more is how future cases similar to the coach case are ruled. I would expect to see more cases, or even more extreme cases, where religious practices at public school are attempted and tested.
As for Maine, my preliminary assumption is that their laws were written too explicitly as anti-religion. I’ve not looked into these kinds of state laws, but I wonder if those laws should be written with less proscriptions, and more prescriptions. E.g. could religion not even be mentioned at all? Just prescribe minimum academic requirements for funding eligibility, e.g. some version of STEM and/or vocational curricula. (Albeit I don’t think that would fully address other issues wrt eligibility of funding for (e.g.) facilities or staff on a per-school or per-school district basis.)
Unseen 1 month, 1 week ago.
