Latest Breaking News

kpete

(72,901 posts) Sun Jul 6, 2014, 01:41 PM Jul 2014

Gitmo detainees' lawyers invoke Hobby Lobby decision in court filing [View all]

Source: Al Jazeera

Gitmo detainees' lawyers invoke Hobby Lobby decision in court filing

The detainees' lawyers said courts have previously concluded that Guantanamo detainees do not have "religious free exercise rights" because they are not “persons within the scope of the RFRA.”

But the detainees’ lawyers say the Hobby Lobby decision changes that.

"Hobby Lobby makes clear that all persons – human and corporate, citizen and foreigner, resident and alien – enjoy the special religious free exercise protections of the RFRA," the lawyers argued in court papers.

Read more: http://america.aljazeera.com/articles/2014/7/5/hobby-lobby-guantanamo.html

43 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Gitmo detainees' lawyers invoke Hobby Lobby decision in court filing [View all] kpete Jul 2014 OP

I tip my hat to them. Erich Bloodaxe BSN Jul 2014 #1

Agreed. Let SC ruling meet unintended consequences. nt avebury Jul 2014 #3

But but but avebury Jul 2014 #2

And only certain Christians at that! nt LiberalElite Jul 2014 #12

Yup. Only the ones who worship that Republican Jesus. You know, the white Jesus who hates Dark n Stormy Knight Jul 2014 #26

Heading over now to our local Jewish Deli for some pulled pork BBQ. 24601 Jul 2014 #13

I'd be willing to bet good money that those who were so thrilled Arkansas Granny Jul 2014 #4

Can the court reverse a decision within a short period? rickford66 Jul 2014 #5

Reverse what? former9thward Jul 2014 #27

That's sorta what I asked. rickford66 Jul 2014 #31

The court will not reverse HL. former9thward Jul 2014 #33

I'll try again. rickford66 Jul 2014 #34

In theory, the Court could grant a timely filed motion for rehearing. onenote Jul 2014 #40

But the Court can pick up another case on the same subject and reverse itself..... happyslug Jul 2014 #43

Can be just few years, the 1894 decision on Income taxes was "Reversed" in just two years. happyslug Jul 2014 #42

I Like This, Ma'am The Magistrate Jul 2014 #6

woops. /nt Ash_F Jul 2014 #7

This should be interesting. Are the detainees people who should be allowed their religious rights? herding cats Jul 2014 #8

and Pandora's box... dhill926 Jul 2014 #9

The worms are crawling out of the can. ;-0 n/t ReRe Jul 2014 #11

Awesome. Ruby the Liberal Jul 2014 #10

That is very interesting thought mazzarro Jul 2014 #23

Theocracy at its finest Ruby the Liberal Jul 2014 #30

As predicted..... pfitz59 Jul 2014 #14

Sorry, only old, rich, white, Conservative, Christian, Republican men can invoke "religious freedom" blkmusclmachine Jul 2014 #15

Ooooo boy This is going to get richer and richer. KauaiK Jul 2014 #16

Wait WHAT littlemissmartypants Jul 2014 #17

But does it apply to female detainees? AllyCat Jul 2014 #18

Maybe I had this wrong but I thought mackerel Jul 2014 #19

Well, the special "Do Not Cite" may mean mazzarro Jul 2014 #25

There is no language like that in the case. former9thward Jul 2014 #29

+1 onenote Jul 2014 #41

Nonsense. former9thward Jul 2014 #28

Agree....On Tuesday...... cynzke Jul 2014 #37

Holy....cow. nt Hekate Jul 2014 #20

This appears to be some good lawyering Gothmog Jul 2014 #21

Wonderful!!!! Let the legal pretzel-bending begin! nt GliderGuider Jul 2014 #22

The Court in Hobby Lobby (my husband called it Rabbit Habbit this morning -- he couldn't JDPriestly Jul 2014 #24

I will admit that of all the potential ripple effects of the HL ruling... DeadLetterOffice Jul 2014 #32

It seems that the utter idiocy.. sendero Jul 2014 #35

Well Now...... cynzke Jul 2014 #36

Well, first they'll need to incorporate... malthaussen Jul 2014 #38

Easy out -- SCOTUS will rule that women are not persons with the scope of the law. nt eppur_se_muova Jul 2014 #39