Five days ago, I posted on a case in which the Bush Administration wants the Court to prevent a purportedly Christian sect from using ceremonial tea--the tea just happens to contain a Schedule I hallucinogen--in spite of the fundie-supported Religious Freedom Restoration Act.
The Supreme Court has agreed to take the case. There may not be a decision for more than a year, because it's too late for the case to be heard this Term. It will presumably be argued in October or November, but the decision might not come until the Court's long summer recess starts at the end of June 2006.
I had not realized that a concurring opinion in the lower court had been written by Michael McConnell, a conservative scholar appointed to the 10th Circuit by Dubya.
Wait? You mean some conservative appointees have slipped through the evil Democratic blockade? He must not be a man of faith. Although he is, as the article notes, "an expert on church-state issues." And now the administration is trying to overturn a decision he made along with his 10th Circuit colleagues.
Update: I should remind folks that the Religious Freedom Restoration Act is not only "fundie-supported," as I mention in this post, but also Arnold-supported. I'm pretty big on the Free Exercise of religion. It's on the Establishment Clause that I disagree with the radical clerics.