Christian Woman Ordered by Cops to Stop Praying in Her Home Loses in Court

MARY ANN SAUSE.

Police have the right to invade your home and abuse you if you’re a Christian.

That’s the essence of a ruling by the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals in closely watched case involving Mary Ann Sause.

If the plaintiff were a Muslim, you have to wonder if the police officer’s conduct would have been ruled illegal discrimination or whether the Court ruling would be the same.

Christian Post

The United States Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled against a Kansas Catholic woman who claims that she was ordered by police to stop praying in her own home.

On Tuesday, the three-judge panel voted to uphold a judge’s dismissal of Mary Anne Sause’s lawsuit against two Louisburg officers, who she said demanded to be allowed into her home and wouldn’t tell her why they were there. She alleged that when she began praying, the officers, who were there because of a noise complaint, ordered her to stop.

An opinion written by Judge Nancy Moritz states that the court assumes that “the defendants violated Sause’s rights under the First Amendment” by repeatedly mocking her, ordering her to stop praying “so they could harass her,” insisting that she reveal scars from a double mastectomy and threatening her with arrest.

“But this assumption doesn’t entitle Sause to relief. Instead, Sause must demonstrate that any reasonable officer would have known this behavior violated the First Amendment,” the judge argued, citing the 2011 Supreme Court ruling in Ashcroft v. al–Kidd, which asserts that the former U.S. attorney general could not be personally sued for the jailing of a U.S. citizen after the events of September 11, 2001.

“But while the conduct alleged in this case may be obviously unprofessional, we can’t say that it’s ‘obviously unlawful,'” the judge added. “It certainly wouldn’t be obvious to a reasonable officer that, in the midst of a legitimate investigation, the First Amendment would prohibit him or her from ordering the subject of that investigation to stand up and direct his or her attention to the officer — even if the subject of the investigation is involved in religiously-motivated conduct at the time, and even if what the officers say or do immediately after issuing that command does nothing to further their investigation.”

First Liberty Institute Deputy General Counsel Jeremy Dys, who represents Sause, said in a statement that the court’s “harsh criticism of the officers’ conduct in this case supports our First Amendment claim.”

“No one should face the prospect of being arrested for praying in their own home,” Dys said.

The First Liberty Institute said in a press release that the government defended the police officers by arguing that the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment only “protects an individual’s right to choose a religion.” Sause’s attorneys argued that the government’s argument misconstrues the fact that the First Amendment protects the right to exercise faith.

“While Ms. Sause’s appeal was ultimately unsuccessful, the court stated clearly that Sause’s First Amendment rights may have been violated, but the legal doctrine of qualified immunity shields the officers from any liability,” First Liberty Institute stated. “The concurring opinion condemned the police officers’ ‘extraordinary contempt of a law abiding citizen.'”

This ruling protects police who might be ignorant of your rights. Be careful when praying in the presence of abusive cops who like to shove people around.

8 thoughts on “Christian Woman Ordered by Cops to Stop Praying in Her Home Loses in Court

  1. “She alleged that when she began praying, the officers, who were there because of a noise complaint, ordered her to stop.”

    As usual the entire article never tells us what the noise complaint was; maybe her 10 cats were going nuts, or she was praying amplified with loudspeakers aimed at her neighbours? I am with the cops on this one. There are many cases where someone cannot begin praying. Let us say a breath test of alcohol by a driver is requested by cops in accord with the law. The driver instead starts reciting verses of scripture as a delaying tactic. Same for a defendant asked to stand in court. Instead kneels and starts praying. Cop interviews suspect, who answers no questions but prays instead. You get the drift of what I mean. Muzzies are much more likely to play this game than Christians. To me, this woman is nutty. “Render unto Caesar what is Caesars” – this includes time requested by lawful agents of Caesar in my opinion, such as his tax collectors.

    I would hope and wish that all Muezzin shouters are banned everywhere in the West. What right do Muslims have to annoy non-Muslims five times a day from a tower with loud yelling?

    • As I wrote in my reply to Wullfe, it seems to me that the right to remain silent when confronted by cops is in play here. She decided to pray instead of remain silent. The cops got angry because she was ignoring them.

      You make some good points with your examples, however. Apparently, you have a right to remain silent but not a right to refuse a breathalyzer.

  2. The ruling sounds as crazy as those presented for Trump’s travel ban.

    “But this assumption doesn’t entitle Sause to relief. Instead, Sause must demonstrate that any reasonable officer would have known this behavior violated the First Amendment,” the judge argued, citing the 2011 Supreme Court ruling in Ashcroft v. al–Kidd, which asserts that the former U.S. attorney general could not be personally sued for the jailing of a U.S. citizen after the events of September 11, 2001.”

    What!!??!!! So, police don’t know praying in your own home doesn’t violate the First Amendment? It must be proven? We know the courts are corrupt, but this is unbelievable!

    I want more background info. Why were the police called for excessive noise? There’s more to this than meets the eye.

    • Don’t get too angry over this until more is known. I think what happened is that they were trying to question her and she ignored them to start praying. Then they verbally abused her.

      To me, praying was just her way of exercising her right to remain silent.

      Cops often beat the rap on qualified immunity. Other government officials do to.

  3. “… two Louisburg officers, who she said demanded to be allowed into her home and wouldn’t tell her why they were there.”

    If this is accurate, I think she would have been entirely justified in shooting both of them if they forced their way into her home.

Leave a Reply. Comments Policy Forbids Insulting Other Commenters.

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 )

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s