Washington,D.C.-On an unusually warm October Monday, dust motes floated in the rays of the sun which were streaming through the windows of the Courtroom. A fan whined lazily in the background while spectators yawned and fidgeted during what seemed like endless arguments on religious displays on public property.
In a yet another religious freedom case being heard before the Supreme Court, ultimately it was the patience of the justices themselves, that wore out. After three hours of anal arguments from both sides in the case, it was Associate Judge, Clarence Thomas, who led the judicial revolt.
He challenged the pro-cross attorney's statement that the symbol of the cross "is ambiguous and therefore innocuous". "You can't just go slapping up religious symbols all over the place and expect people to respect your beliefs." The judge argued.
The statement was met with cheers from the team of anti-cross attorneys, who were just as quickly rebuked by Thomas:
"I haven't even started with you yet!" he remind them, pointing a finger at their lead attorney. "If you are so easily offended by what you see around you, that you have to rush to court every time you spot something new, then I suggest that you're not only hyper-sensitive, but quite possibly insane!"
Other justices agreed, saying that if all they heard were arguments for every single religious rights infringement case on appeal, they'd never have time for anything else. In the end the justices voted, 9-0, to return the case to a lower court where a judge they hold a grudge against presides.
