on June 6, 2025, 14:16:22, in reply to "It's an odd hill to die on. But this linked article perhaps suggests who might have . . . "
"Groups like the Freedom From Religion Foundation said the ruling could radically expand exemptions for hospitals or health systems with religious ties, which could end up leaving 700,000 to more than 1 million workers without unemployment coverage."
And I get the economic repercussions of that. I totally get it. To me, that is a good reason to expend scarce resources to fight for the statute. But even if you cave, you just change the state statute so that employers of a certain size or engaged in health care are not entitled to the exemption. Pretty easy fix, but still a PITA and I get why you would fight to save the statute.
The bigger issue is that people have to discharge governmental duties in good faith and in furtherance of "We The People" not to grind their political axe. If this was a politically motivated move targeted at churches, if I was dictator of the world the people who pursued this case would be sharing a prison cell with the clerks of court who refused to issue same sex marriage certificates. Government interactions with citizens are not the avenue for you to virtue signal and people who misuse government resources in such a manner deserve a trip to the federal pen, IMHO. Previous Message
. . . driven this little crusade. The usual suspects.
[url=https://www.wpr.org/news/us-supreme-court-catholic-charities-religious-rights-unemployment-taxes#:~:text=The%20U.S.%20Supreme%20Court%20has,pay%20unemployment%20tax%20to%20Wisconsin.]https://www.wpr.org/news/us-supreme-court-catholic-charities-religious-rights-unemployment-taxes#:~:text=The%20U.S.%20Supreme%20Court%20has,pay%20unemployment%20tax%20to%20Wisconsin.
"Iowa women were better than Illini men" - Potomac27