Talk:Kennedy v. Bremerton School District

Lemon v. Kurtzman
Did this case explicitly overruled Lemon v. Kurtzman? SoupI (talk) 15:35, 27 June 2022 (UTC)


 * Gorsuch and Sotomayor disagree on this, but their area of agreement is enough to leave Lemon in the summary box as having been overturned, I believe. Gorsuch argues the court had already "abandoned" Lemon in American Legion v. American Humanist Association. Sotomayor says this is the decision that "overrules" Lemon, and that the plurality decision in American Legion simply said 'that application of the Lemon test to “longstanding monuments, symbols, and practices” was ill-advised for reasons specific to those contexts.' Either way, Lemon is not good law after this decision. Kinetic yankee (talk) 20:22, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
 * I've reviewed the various opinions the Court issued in American Legion, and my confidence in my previous comment--and Sotomayor's characterization of the state of play of Lemon prior to Kennedy--is bolstered. it looks like a strong case for saying the Court stopped shy in American Legion of overruling Lemon (which therefore makes Kennedy the case that overruled Lemon). A majority of six justices, in two separate opinions, are strongly critical of Lemon, with comments like "the Court has many times either expressly declined to apply the [Lemon] test or simply ignored it." But they do not claim to have overruled Lemon. It is left to Thomas, in a concurring opinion, to write "I would take the logical next step and overrule the Lemon test in all contexts." Thomas' comment is the only appearance of "overrule" in American Legion; the other justices see Lemon as being of limited use, but they don't say it's never good law. Kinetic yankee (talk) 20:52, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
 * There is no explicit overrule of Lemon v. Kurtzman. The SCOTUS not applying the Lemon test to determine the case didn't mean that Lemon is overturned. Sotomayor stated that the court overruled Lemon, but other justices didn't say so, merely rejecting the use of Lemon on this case. This means that Lemon test would still be around to be used, though it may not be used for future cases.  &maltese; SunDawn &maltese;     (contact)   15:03, 30 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep on mind that often decisions will not explicitly say X is overturned but the legal analysts will come to read that. There is no formL process by which a past decision is officially overturned. M asem (t) 15:08, 30 June 2022 (UTC)

Do Not Revert My Edits Again
You are showing bias toward The Satanic Temple and are defrauding the public. You are not being encyclopedic. RandomFrequentFlyerDent (talk) 10:45, 4 July 2022 (UTC)


 * I've reviewed the past few revisions of this page, and found a mention of a supposed coworker of Kennedy, Wesley Bonetti, being a practicing Satanist, most recently in this revision and reverted in the following revision. I'm having trouble finding secondary sources that even mention this Wesley Bonetti as being related to the case, and I can't find sources saying Kennedy is, or ever has been, employed by Puget Sound Naval Shipyard. As an encyclopedia, Wikipedia cannot include this information without first finding a credible source (see: WP:NOR). Could you perhaps find an example? Thanks, Askarion   💬●✒️ 23:22, 4 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Yeah, none of the sources I've seen mention this supposed coworker or the involvement of the Satanic Temple. There needs to be clear secondary sourcing of why this is important. --M asem (t) 23:43, 4 July 2022 (UTC)