The stirring of a theocracy

Sinfonian at Blast Off! predicts we will lose this first real challenge to the separation of church and state:

For the first time, the current Supreme Court has faced the thorny issue of the separation of church and state. The case argued yesterday is the first challenge to Drunky McStagger's faith-based initiatives to reach the SCOTUS, but the issue is one of standing -- that is, "whether ordinary taxpayers have the right to sue over the Bush administration's embrace of faith-based organizations."

He quotes the Washington Post:

Alito, Justice Antonin Scalia and Roberts -- whom Clements three times said was "exactly right" in his view of the case -- seemed most sympathetic to the government's argument, and Justice Anthony M. Kennedy worried about the courts "supervising the White House." Justice Clarence Thomas did not ask questions, but has written in the past that he does not think that the establishment clause gives rise to individual complaints.

Justice Stephen G. Breyer seemed most skeptical of the government's position that only congressional action involving taxing and spending was open to taxpayer challenge. "What's wrong with just saying that Flast stands for the proposition that when the government spends money in violation of the establishment clause, a taxpayer -- after all, the money comes from the taxpayer -- can bring a lawsuit?" he asked.