At the New Yorker, satirist Andy Borowitz provided his comments on the Town of Greece v. Galloway case. At first, I thought he was satirizing the dissent and its idea that the public square could be “religious free.” Then I caught myself and realized he was satirizing the majority opinion. Borowitz writes:
“In what legal experts are calling a landmark decision, on Monday the United States Supreme Court struck down what many believe to be the main reason the country was started.
By a five-to-four vote, the Court eliminated what grade-school children have traditionally been taught was one of the key rationales for founding the United States in the first place.
“The separation of church and state has been a cornerstone of American democracy for over two hundred years,” said Justice Samuel Alito, writing for the majority. “Getting rid of it was long overdue.”
Calling the decision “historic,” Justice Antonin Scalia was guarded in predicting what the Court might accomplish next.
“Last year, we gutted the Voting Rights Act, and today we did the First Amendment,” he said. “We’ll just have to see what’s left.”
The reason for my initial (mistaken) impression in identifying the target of his satire, however, is that it SO eloquently describes Justice Kagan’s dissent in Galloway. Borowitz could have written (about the main dissent):
“In what legal experts are calling a landmark decision, on Monday the United States Supreme Court struck down what many believe to be the main reason the country was started—[religious freedom].”
By a five-to-four vote, the Court eliminated what grade-school children have traditionally been taught was one of the key rationales for founding the United States in the first place—[freedom from government interference with their religious practices].”
“The separation of church and state [Religious freedom] has been a cornerstone of American democracy for over two hundred years,” said Justice [Elena Kagan] Samuel Alito, writing for the majority. “Getting rid of it was long overdue.”
Calling the decision “historic,” Justice [Stephen Breyer] Antonin Scalia was guarded in predicting what the Court might accomplish next.
“Last year, we gutted the [Defense of Marriage Act] Voting Rights Act, and today we did the First Amendment,” he said. “We’ll just have to see what’s left.”
“[People have had the ability to pray according to their conscience for far too long,” Kagan continued. “It’s about time religious freedom is sidelined so the government can once again edit prayers for nonsectarian compliance, in accord with the proud Establishment traditions of the Old World].”
Borowitz might be disheartened (or perhaps heartened) to know his satire is actually (unwittingly) poking fun at the liberty-opposing dissent in Galloway. Nevertheless, it does. Indeed, it was Justice Kagan and her fellow dissenters who would have the government in the business of editing prayers for compliance with nonsectarian principles established by the government. Such government interference with religion was the very tyranny the Founders fled from. It was unconstitutional then, and is equally unconstitutional today.
