ACLU files lawsuit over Missouri prayer measure

Thursday, August 9, 2012

KANSAS CITY, Mo. (AP) — An amendment to the Missouri Constitution on prayer and religious expression prompted a lawsuit Wednesday, just one day after it was approved by voters.

The American Civil Liberties Union alleges that a provision in the amendment that says the religious rights of prison inmates are limited to federal law violates the 14th Amendment's equal protection clause and the First Amendment's protection of religious freedom.

The Missouri Constitution provides more protections of religious liberty than the U.S. Constitution, so the state can't remove protections in a way that affects just one group, said Tony Rothert, legal director of the ACLU of Eastern Missouri.

Rothert said he couldn't cite an example of how the amendment would adversely affect inmates. He said that when judges have found that something violates an inmate's rights under the Missouri Constitution, they've found it violates their First Amendment rights too.

The lawsuit was filed on behalf of two inmates against the head of Missouri's Department of Corrections. The department didn't immediately respond to an email seeking comment.

The new amendment is more widely known for specifically protecting public prayer and letting students avoid assignments that violate their religious beliefs. It also requires Missouri public schools to post the text of the U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights.

The ballot summary didn't mention the provision addressing prisoners' religious rights. A legal challenge over the summary was rejected earlier this year.

"There will probably be many lawsuits," Rothert said. "This is just one very narrow challenge of one small part of this amendment. There are multiple ways that the amendment is susceptible to legal challenge."

More like this story

Graceful 9 months, 2 weeks ago

The ACLU should be declared a terrorist organization.

jdb 9 months, 2 weeks ago

I agree with Graceful, the ACLU IS a terrorist organization. The ACLU is full of terrorists, ie lawyers. Therefore all lawyers are terrorists.

Sequoia 9 months, 2 weeks ago

Much legal writing can be likened to the "spray and pray" school of terrorist marksmanship.

In this case, though, the ACLU is spot on. Religious freedom for one is religious freedom for all, right? Even prisoners.

Lawyers are responsible for the current state of confusing affairs: where we say corporations are people, but we treat prisoners (actual people) like animals.

sickandtired 9 months, 2 weeks ago

Sequoia I have to agree with you-most inmates are animals. they act like a lion, or a pack of wolves. They prey on their victims and attack when they least expect it. They give no consideration for the people or the families that they hurt(just like a pack of animals). As many of the liberals have stated on this site-people care about and help each other, animals don't. I wonder what inmates fall under.

Sequoia 9 months, 2 weeks ago

It's certainly true that many inmates have indulged too far into their biological instincts, and so it is certainly justified for a human society to protect itself from the biological impulses of the society's members, through culture, institutions and, sometimes, prison.

But, just because some prisoners have behaved like animals, that doesn't mean that society ought to treat them all that way. The society is supposed to perserve a higher quality evolution whereby people treat each other as people, and where we don't go around actingl like animals.

We're punishing inmates (whether it's Bernie Madoff or the mugger in the alley) BECAUSE they take what they want without regard to the law, the way an animal takes another's food.

So why would people like sickandtired apparently condone and celebrate the fact that the very social institutions we trust to preserve our humanity indulge in the animalistic desire for vengance and de-humanizing forms of domination that DEBASE our humanity?

Why doesn't sickandtired elevate his thinking above that of the criminal?

Maybe he's not immune to animal desire, either. No one is. That's why we have to keep watch very carefully.

And please, animals DO care about and help each other. My dog loves me!

Gabrielle 9 months, 2 weeks ago

Grace: please elaborate on your last sentence here - '...was supposed to protect the people from federal interference is now a weapon to take away the people' right to rule themselves'

MO4LIFE 9 months, 2 weeks ago

So should the Tea Party & Refuglicans. For Obstruction of government.

BubbaD 9 months, 2 weeks ago

I'd say the same about the Tea clan...

kayak2 9 months, 2 weeks ago

BubbaD - and you would base that statement on what . . . . ?

BubbaD 9 months, 2 weeks ago

The post by hkchas is correct. My tongue was thrust firmly into my cheek, hoping such a mirror would arrest someone from constantly posting opinions as if they were facts.

BubbaD 9 months, 2 weeks ago

My tongue was thrust firmly in my cheek. hkchas is quite right, I was making the point that anyone could just as easily say something just as poorly founded and ridiculous as Grace.

Guitarman 9 months, 2 weeks ago

When you become an inmate of our prison system, you should lose your right as a free citizen. Unless they have been mistreated or harmed they shouldn't have the right to sue anyone.

Sequoia 9 months, 2 weeks ago

Jail inmates include those who can't post bail and are held until trial, so many "inmates" actually haven't been convicted of anything yet. Moreover, our Constitutional rights come from our creation as humans, so how can they be lost in prison? And anyway, the inmates aren't suing anyone here. The ACLU is suing.

JCLifer 9 months, 2 weeks ago

"Moreover, our Constitutional rights come from our creation as humans,..."

Please tell me more.

Sequoia 9 months, 2 weeks ago

Gladly. The government doesn't give us our rights. Every human being has the same rights (remember the Declaration of Independence... "we are endowed by our Creator with certain inalielable rights..."). In the U.S., we have a constitution that protects those God-given rights from the government, but permits the government to restrict our ability to exercise our rights after due process of law.

spelchek 9 months, 2 weeks ago

" And anyway, the inmates aren't suing anyone here. The ACLU is suing." -- Wrong. From the story: "The lawsuit was filed on behalf of two inmates against the head of Missouri's Department of Corrections." And you want us to believe your conservative.

sickandtired 9 months, 2 weeks ago

Well according to the article the ACLU lawyer couldn't give an example of how it would adversely affect inmates but that if they say it adversely affects inmates it adversely affects the first amendment. So basically he is doing this because he wants to shoot the entire amendment down. Seems funny that a lawyer wants to use the court system to cancel out something that the people voted for by an overwhelming majority. If you have a problem with prayer in public then don't do it, but don't tell me that the only place I can pray is in my home. maybe I want to pray in the middle of the capital, or at the beginning of an important meeting.

Sequoia 9 months, 2 weeks ago

Yeah it was funny when you and I were having that discussion a couple months back about the Supreme Court's health care case.

You know, when you argued that a lawyer ought to use the court system to cancel out something that the people voted for by an overwhelming majority?

Remember that, dude? That sure seemed funny, didn't it?

Like in that case, the court will only strike down the unconstitutional language. The rest of the law will stand.

And, please, nobody is telling you that you can't pray in public. That's why this amendment was stupid. YOU ALREADY HAD THE RIGHT TO PRAY IN PUBLIC. No one is telling you that the only place you can pray is your home. Who is telling you that? "Liberals?" Come on. That's fake. You're making that up. No one has ever told you that the only place you can pray is your home.

Wise up! Know your rights. You could already go pray in the middle of the capital before this amendment passed.

Don't be a sucker.

Sequoia 9 months, 2 weeks ago

Obama campaigned to reform health care. The law was approved by Congress. The health care law was a completely legitimate expression of the public will.

I'm just pointing out how sickandtired's principles shift based on the ideology involved. No principles. Just politics. It's pretty weak.

os2hank 9 months, 2 weeks ago

Shame the did not read the bill before voting on it - - did you???

JCLifer 9 months, 2 weeks ago

Everyone wants everything insured, they just don't want to pay for it. With ObamaCare, they think "the Govment" is gonna pay for it all for free. Where do they think the money comes from?

JCLifer 9 months, 2 weeks ago

Nothing is free. And when the government gets involved, the administrative inefficiencies and costs go way up. That is my beef with ObamaCare. How are we going to pay for every coverage for everybody, especially with the inefficient government adding so many costs and delays?

Also, the purpose of insurance is to protect against catastrophic losses, not cover every little pill or bandaide. Everyone wants everything for free, and that is going to cost all of us a lot more than we are paying now. The only way it would not cost more is if the frequency or quality of services goes way down. Another word for that is "rationing". Another phrase is "denial of service".
Folks think things are bad now. Just wait until the government gets involved and see how bad it gets for everyone.

RobHunterJohnson 9 months, 2 weeks ago

Lifer, maybe you need to run over to Super D and pick up some pills for a aging relative for her next month? Oh don't worry Rob if the check seems a little high! $800.00 + Why don't you tell us how you would fix this Health Problem? Rob

JCLifer 9 months, 2 weeks ago

Rob, you need to call the Death Panel to see if it is cost-effective to spend $800.00+ / month on pils for some old lady. Maybe if it enables her to go to the polling place and vote it will be worth it.

asb 9 months, 2 weeks ago

Trollin', trollin', trollin', Hank, you shouldn't respond to Lifer in this mood, the posts have no value and only encourage more of the same. I'd say Spelkak is in the same mood.

JCLifer 9 months, 2 weeks ago

Yeah, our moods get kind of sour when we are asked to pay more and more taxes to be wasted by the bureacrats in the name of helping the poor 47% who pay no taxes.

Actually, I would say that the mood for a revolution in this country is just about ripe.

dokeus6 9 months, 2 weeks ago

"I don't know of anyone that wants to end either one, even theough they are proven failures."

politicalruminations.com/quotes-about-paul-ryan/

One of your final three picks for vice president is wanting to do exactly that and The Republicans want to privatize social security.

You make statements like this and makes you look like someone who has no clue what she is talking about. Then you wonder why no one takes your opinion seriously.

dokeus6 9 months, 2 weeks ago

Where do you think that article was found Grace? I'm sorry if I took the time to make your statement look stupid. Where do you think I found it? I found it by just typing Who wants to End Medicare and Social Security in a google search.

Your reality is sure a lot different than the one I live in. I'm sure your BMW handles great and your house on Schellridge keeps you warm.

Here is a heads up for you I didn't make the " I don't know anyone who want to end either one statement". That statement is entirely yours Sugar. You have to eat that crow.

RobHunterJohnson 9 months, 2 weeks ago

For wall street! Rob

RobHunterJohnson 9 months, 2 weeks ago

RAND PAUL! Rob

JCLifer 9 months, 2 weeks ago

That is exactly what some ObamaCare government Bureacrat is going to call her, if not by her social security number. Putting in a huge government buracracy is not going to fix health care or lower health care costs in this country.
When you have bureacrats deciding/approving care for people, the service is not going to get any better than if the doctor is the one deciding the care.

asb 9 months, 2 weeks ago

The doctor doesn't decide, an actuary decides. I'll take a bureaucrat any day!

JCLifer 9 months, 2 weeks ago

More liberal lies! You do not know that the old lady is someone's mother or wife. "EVERY" old lady is not married or a mother.

Caught another lying liberal! Easy as shooting fish in a barrel!

RobHunterJohnson 9 months, 2 weeks ago

Lifer it was her money, I will not judge you, but someday you will be. Rob

JCLifer 9 months, 2 weeks ago

Rob, not sure what you are trying to say here. Are you saying that the government (us taxpayers) should pay for everyone's prescriptions, even if they have the money and/or insurance coverage?

Of course I will be judged. I know what side I'll be on, too.

Jesus said there will be poor always. He also said that it would be harder for a rich man to enter the Kingdom of God than for a camel to pass through a needle.

sickandtired 9 months, 2 weeks ago

Sequoia there are 2 things wrong with the above statement. 1) the people did not vote overwhelmingly for Obama care. The senate and the house voted by party lines( after several behind closed door crooked deals) for Obama care. 2) The reason I said the lawyers should hash it out is because they wanted a mandate they cannot have. even the courts agreed on that. it just happened they won by a different avenue. In this case you actually have several examples of people telling me I cannot pray out loud in public. Most of the examples fall under atheists going to court to stop prayer in schools, public meetings, public property. I am curious what I am making up. If Atheists don't want to pray then don't, but don't sop me from praying, even out loud.

Sequoia 9 months, 2 weeks ago

I think you mean the cases that say that government actors, like teachers or government officials, can't endorse a particular religion or lead people in prayer. That's against the law. That's STILL against the law with this amendment.

That's completely different than individual students prayin on their own in schools, or you saying a prayer, out loud, in a public building. That has always been legal. That's STILL legal with this amendment.

You don't know your own rights. You're acting like you're all offended by atheists, and you don't even know what you're offended by. What "several examples" are you talking about, specifically?

No one has ever told you that you can't pray in public. No one has ever tried to stop you from praying in any way, or any where.

You're trying to pose like you're persecuted. You're not persecuted. You're fake.

Sequoia 9 months, 2 weeks ago

I don't think anyone in America is "marginalized" for praying. The vast majority of Americans are Christian, and many of our biggest celebrities pray on the national and world stage.

There are places in the world where Christians are truly persecuted. America is not one of them. You're not bullied. You're not oppressed. You just can't use the power of the state to reflect your spiritual beliefs, which is the way it should be.

Please. Quit trying to play the victim.

tonto_goldberg 9 months, 2 weeks ago

Compared to our current arbitrary, capricious, and inefficient system, I am ready to try something else. Bring it on.

spelchek 9 months, 2 weeks ago

Meanwhile, border agents are being told to stand down in Arizona when it comes to enforcing federal immigration laws.

RobHunterJohnson 9 months, 2 weeks ago

No. It seems to me that you are out of tough with health insurance issues. The conversation about the death panel? That seems to be a rally cry. I asked of you the other day what is the plan? I hear a lot of retoric from alot of sources, I gasp when I think what my insurance costs and I am healthy for 55, what is it going to cost me at the end of Romenys term, or President Obamas 2nd term. I seem to have an idea with the President, but if everything is in utter chaos because of a bunch of Republican congressmen who have not done anything like these last 2 years. What is the cost of insurance to be? I still want to know what you think? Ther is no planning, Social Security is in the air, Medicare as well, and with the likes of Rep. Ryan Wi., or Sen Rand KY? Health Care, we could go back to the 80s with President Reagen, and Bush who did not do anything? President Clinton tried but was heldback by numerous item good as well as bad. President Bush 2 did nothing what so ever, President Obama has attempted and succeeded, but here come the new republicans with their pledges to Norquist or his succesor. Romeny He is Rich, I feel he is out of touch with all but a few. Where will he stand on this for me and you, I assume you are retired and on Medicare, if you are not you will be. What is your plan if they strip medicare from under your feet, we have paid for this. Rob

JCLifer 9 months, 2 weeks ago

We are so scrued no matter who wins.

RobHunterJohnson 9 months, 2 weeks ago

Guess what is to be Rep Ryan today? Rob

Commenting has been disabled for this item.

ACLU files lawsuit over Missouri prayer measure

More like this story

Comments