Federal Judge Rejects Challenge to Missouri Prayer Amendment

The legislators and citizens in Missouri took a bold stand to protect their religious liberties. Anti-God groups tried every argument to prove such a measure unconstitutional including the failed one noted in the article below, but to no avail. This is a clear victory for every citizen!

The fundamental principles that our Founders understood as necessary to secure freedom have again been confirmed in Missouri! It is only through fervent prayer and persistence that we will see this Republic realign with the vision of the Founders.

Stay engaged and inspired – for truly we will reap if we do not grow weary.

Federal Judge Rejects Challenge to Missouri Prayer Amendment

A federal judge has dismissed a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of Missouri’s new religious liberty amendment.  U.S District Judge Howard Sachs has ruled against a challenge filed by the American Civil Liberties  Union on behalf of two inmates incarcerated in state prisons.    

The religious liberty language, placed on the ballot as Amendment 2, was approved by Missouri voters last August by a resounding vote of 83 to 17 percent.  Commonly referred to as the Missouri Prayer Amendment, the measure spells out in considerable detail the free exercise rights of Missouri citizens and schoolchildren.

The lawsuit challenged a provision that declared that the new amendment did not expand the rights of prisoners beyond those afforded by the laws of the United States.   The ACLU had contended that this section would somehow diminish the religious freedoms previously held by individuals incarcerated in Missouri prisons.

Judge Sachs concluded that the plaintiffs failed to specify any “instance where the amendment takes away a specific right,” or any particular program or condition that would be impacted by the amendment.  Sachs agreed with the the defense of the State of Missouri that the case was a “moot dispute over abstract, hypothetical concepts.” 

“No practical change in the law can be supposed, and plaintiffs fail to suggest hypothetical situations where the results would be altered by the new amendment,” Judge Sachs wrote.  “Without a plausible claim of actual  prejudice,  justification becomes unnecessary.”

The ACLU has unsuccessfully argued that the Missouri Constitution prior to Amendment 2 provided more expansive religious liberties than those articulated in the First Amendment to the federal constitution.  Judge Sachs agreed with state courts that no such evidence exists.


About CPCFoundation

An unprecedented, nationwide movement of praying Legislators and citizens who are taking action to protect our Judeo-Christian heritage and religious liberty.
This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s