We won! Or rather she won! Senior District Judge Ronald Lagueux handed in his decision yesterday that the prayer display at Cranston West is unconstitutional and must be removed. Here’s the full press conference, courtesy of atomicsteve.
I have to admit I didn’t think this would happen. Not for any lack of evidence, competence, or merit on Ahlquist’s part, but because in cases like this, such as the granite 10 Commandments display in Alabama, courts have often cited the “historic” or “cultural” significance, rather than the religious significance, as being acceptable motivations for displaying such blatantly religious symbols. They often also cite a sort of “no one’s ever complained about this before, therefore it shouldn’t matter” plea.
Not this time.
This time, reason won out, or as I like to say “ratio semper vincet.” (Yes, I’m always this level of a pretentious, linguistic douchebag!) Word is that city officials may appeal, but I honestly don’t think they’ll win. They’d end up looking like jerks (thought that’s never stopped the religious before) and I think they know that Ahlquist has little things like the Establishment Clause on her side.
It’s not all puppies and rainbows. Ahlquist has faced her share of backlash, as seen here (courtesy of JesusFetusFajitaFishsticks):
And those were just the ones that jumped out at me!
In the end, though, this is a wonderful thing for no other reason than in the American justice system, we operate on an establishment of precedents. Hey, Sydney, Rachel, and Alyssa. Suck on this precedent, bitches.