While lower courts for years have often recognized a “ministerial exception” to federal, state and local laws against discrimination in the workplace, the Supreme Court itself had never done so. Although bold in some ways, the decision was, in fact, quite cautious.
Is it time to finally declare Dixie “changed”? That is at the heart of the Texas redistricting decision now before the Supreme Court.
In 1921, when Benjamin Cardozo was a justice on New York’s highest state court (about a decade before he would become a Supreme Court Justice), he cautioned in a famous lecture series that logic could become too strong a driving force as judges decided cases.
It is fair to assume that no member of the current Court would publicly advocate abandonment of the preferred status of individual rights or the lesser protection of economic liberties; the Court regularly applies only a rationality test to economic legislation.