The Supreme Court ruled against a Rastafarian on Tuesday, and California state senator and congressional candidate Scott Wiener is whining that only certain religions are respected by the government, and somehow connected the case to the LGBTQ community. Those are the constituents Wiener represents in California — the LGBTQ community.
Breaking News: The Supreme Court said a Rastafarian whose dreadlocks were forcibly shaved by prison guards could not sue them for money. https://t.co/wiJuvxa9Hq
— The New York Times (@nytimes) June 23, 2026
A lot of people are calling this a "religious freedom for me, not for thee" situation, as Rastafaris often grow dreadlocks in what they see as a biblical prohibition of cutting one's hair. The court's ruling, however, simply said that Damon Landor can't hold the guards financially responsible. Mark Sherman reports for the Associated Press:
The Supreme Court on Tuesday barred a former Louisiana inmate from suing prison officials who cut off his dreadlocks in violation of his Rastafari religious beliefs.
The justices condemned what happened to the former inmate, Damon Landor. But they ruled that a federal law designed to protect the religious rights of inmates does not permit lawsuits for money damages against individuals even when rights are violated.
The high court, in a 6-3 decision, agreed with lower courts that without exception had ruled that the law, the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act, can’t be used to hold those who violate inmates’ rights financially responsible.
Looks like “religious freedom” only applies to bakers who don’t want to make cakes for gay couples & parents who don’t want their kids to learn that LGBTQ people exist.
— Senator Scott Wiener (@Scott_Wiener) June 23, 2026
The Supreme Court’s extreme “religious freedom” approach is designed exclusively to support the Court’s own… pic.twitter.com/UcIMG7B6S8
The post continues:
… politics. One more reason this political body needs to be expanded & subjected to term limits.
Nah.
Does Wiener think that Masterpiece Cakeshop must be compelled to bake a cake for a lesbian wedding? Of course, he does.
So dishonest. The ruling was narrow that you cannot sue INDIVIDUAL OFFICIALS. The decision is not even related to religious freedom.
— Mark in SF (@Mark_in_SF) June 23, 2026
Your post is one more reason you should be ejected from congress.
— Elie Scarit (@ScaritElie) June 23, 2026
That is NOT what the court ruled.
If you need help learning how to read or a study partner to help you work on reading comprehension, a private tutor is but a phone call away Senator.
Expand the court to 15 and then a constitutional amendment to prohibit further expansion.
— bobby harvey horn (@BobbyHarveyHorn) June 23, 2026
I’m with you! Trump needs to do it now!
Shut up, Scott. I’d tell you to read the decision but the words are too long for you.
— Kevin Snyder (@xavierjamesg) June 23, 2026
What a weird twist on two completely different things. You're a certifiable idiot.
— ChristianArmor (@stickernista) June 23, 2026
Misrepresent the issue much???
— Zombiezone (@MichaelLongane1) June 23, 2026
Read the ruling, retard.
— Nathan Thompson (@truthprevials) June 23, 2026
He tried to exploit a law that applies locally.
His base was wrong, lost because of his own technicality exploit failed.
The court is not a legislative authority, no matter how much you libtards want it to be.
It will rule that either the case has legal… pic.twitter.com/sjUQZC8Z9b
The post continues:
… grounds or does not, or will not take the case.
Here it did take the case and ruled that the argument used was not valid.
It is that simple.
The court will not rule based on something the defendant or the plaintiff did not use in their argument.
You are supposed to be a legislator and yet are unable to understand basics.
You should be nowhere near public office. You are a danger to our republic and to the rule of law, in addition to being a creep.
Stop whining.
— Nathan Thompson (@truthprevials) June 23, 2026
Religions freedom is actually under attack because of entitled creeps and perverts like you.
Too bad you can't buy class with all that donor money, creep.
Wiener is still butthurt that a Christian back in 2012 couldn't be legally forced to make a wedding cake for a lesbian wedding, so he's trying to use this case to prove that only Christians have religious liberty in this country. He somehow manages to make everything about LGBTQ rights.
***
