Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/21pdf/21-418_i425.pdf
Page Number: 75

Cite as:  597 U. S. ____ (2022) 

35 

SOTOMAYOR, J., dissenting 

while the second erects a “backstop that disables our gov-
ernment from breaking it” and “start[ing] us down the path
to the past, when [the right to free exercise] was routinely
abridged.”  Trinity  Lutheran  Church  of  Columbia,  Inc.  v. 
Comer, 582 U. S. ___, ___ (2017) (SOTOMAYOR, J., dissent-
ing) (slip op., at 26).

Today,  the  Court  once  again  weakens  the  backstop.    It 
elevates one individual’s interest in personal religious exer-
cise, in the exact time and place of that individual’s choos-
ing, over society’s interest in protecting the separation be-
tween  church  and  state,  eroding  the  protections  for
religious liberty for all.  Today’s decision is particularly mis-
guided  because  it  elevates  the  religious  rights  of  a  school 
official,  who  voluntarily  accepted  public  employment  and 
the limits that public employment entails, over those of his 
students,  who  are  required  to  attend  school  and  who  this 
Court has long recognized are particularly vulnerable and 
deserving of protection.  In doing so, the Court sets us fur-
ther  down  a  perilous  path  in  forcing  States  to  entangle
themselves with religion, with all of our rights hanging in 
the balance.  As much as the Court protests otherwise, to-
day’s decision is no victory for religious liberty.  I respect-
fully dissent.