As the appellate panel noted:

The claim presented by Domineque Ray touches at the heart of the Establishment Clause. Indeed, we can think of no principle more elemental to the Establishment Clause than that the states and the federal government shall not favor one religious denomination over another. In the words of the Supreme Court: "The clearest command of the Establishment Clause is that one religious denomination cannot be officially preferred over another." Larson v. Valente, 456 U.S. 228, 244 (1982). Since Everson v. Board of Education, the Supreme Court "has adhered to the principle, clearly manifested in the history and logic of the Establishment Clause, that no State can ‘pass laws which aid one religion' or that ‘prefer one religion over another.'" Larson, 456 U.S. at 246 (quoting Everson, 330 U.S. at 15).

As to the claim's alleged untimeliness:

[A]rguments suggesting unreasonable delay on Ray's part are far less compelling. For starters, a review of the relevant statutory text would not have put Ray or his lawyers on notice that the institution's Christian Chaplain would always be present in the execution chamber or that Ray's Imam could never be. The Alabama Code only says that certain persons "may be present at an execution"; it does not say that the Chaplain will be present. Ala. Code § 15–1883(a) (emphasis added). It lists both the Chaplain and "[t]he spiritual advisor of the condemned" as among those who "may be present," without drawing any distinction between where these two individuals will be situated during the execution. Id. Nor does the statute distinguish between the execution chamber and the witness viewing room, nor, finally, does it say anything about whether the Chaplain may have contact with the inmate at the critical moment. Id. Even the most careful review of the statute by Ray or his lawyers would not have revealed that the prison's Christian Chaplain will stand in the execution chamber while any other spiritual advisor, relatives or friends, and members of the press are in a separate room.

On January 23, only after Ray requested and was denied a religious accommodation, he asked the Warden and the Chaplain to see the prison's policies requiring that Holman's prison Chaplain, and only the prison Chaplain, would be placed in the execution chamber during an execution; he was told that he could not see Alabama's written policy. There is little reason, then, to think that he must have known the contents of these confidential policies at an earlier date. Indeed, the fact that these procedures have been filed thoroughly redacted and under seal is a further indication that Alabama's execution procedures are closely guarded by the ADOC.

Thus we are left with only the suggestion that he must have known ADOC policies from an earlier date because he sat on death row for a lengthy period of time. But the state has provided no evidence that Ray would have learned at any point about these polices or that he could have filed a lawsuit challenging these policies any earlier than he did. According to Ray -- and it is unrebutted on this record -- he first requested and was denied accommodations based on his religion on January 23. He filed his complaint in district court on January 28, just five days later (including two days which fell over a weekend). The state has not provided us with any evidence that Ray knew or should have known that his religious beliefs would not be accommodated prior to January 23, or that he had any opportunity to request an accommodation prior to that date.

Republicans on the Supreme Court will bend over backwards to protect a Christian from the travesty of having to serve a gay customer, but when it comes to a textbook Establishment Clause violation that fundamentally harms a Muslim, they devote one paragraph to denying his claim on a technicality that doesn't even exist.

We can look forward to a lifetime of disgusting decisions like this one. If you voted for Trump, or didn't vote at all, go ---- yourself.

And we should care about this person's comfort... WHY????

I don't care about this person.

I care about separation of church and state, and the First Amendment to the Constitution.

I care about the integrity of our judiciary.

I care about not having Christian conservative ideologues on the Supreme Court.

You, being a worthless troll, do not care about any of those things, which is certainly your prerogative.

I'd love to hear from a Republican on the merits of this decision. Bringing up Jill Stein and third party voting just gives them bait to talk about something else.

Separation of church and state is a problem for Christians only.

You're a moron. The term "church" in "separation of church and state" is a reference to all religion. Why are you even posting on a topic you are so ignorant about?

Muslims don't need last rites or a priest before dying

That doesn't mean they can't request them anyway if the same treatment is being given to a Christian. I'm reluctant to take your claim as true regardless given how stupid you've already demonstrated yourself to be.

#16 they didn't have any Imams on staff

If the state doesn't have a DOC-approved imam, then that's part of the violation. They are the ones who wrote a law allowing people in the execution chamber and interpreted it as Christian Chaplains only. Making them hire people is part of the remedy.

Does this mean if an atheist is sentenced to death in Alabama they have to put up with a stupid Christian minister on their death bed?

Per the appellate opinion, here is how it works in Alabama:

During the execution, Chaplain Summers, a Christian, will kneel at the side of the prisoner and pray with him if the inmate requests prayer. If the inmate does not want pastoral care from Chaplain Summers, he will remain in the execution chamber standing unobtrusively by the wall. The inmate's designated witnesses, limited to six, along with any spiritual advisor other than Chaplain Summers, may be seated in a witness room, separated from the death chamber by a large window.

So you still don't understand what "separation of church and state" means in America?

Cool post, bro.

Trump wasn't elected by a majority, you absolute clown.

I meant a majority of voters.

What do you think of this Supreme Court decision?

#40 So you disagree with the conservative majority of the Court which upheld Alabama's enforcement of a law that only allows a Christian Chaplain in the room?