Shocked...Shocked, I Tell You

 Common sense is the foundation of all authorities, of the laws themselves, and of their construction.

Thomas Jefferson

Tom isn't around to insist on that from the law, and so we have City of Ocala v. Rojas. 

In 2014, a shooting occurred in Ocala, Florida. (If you're wondering where that is, draw a line due west from Daytona, and it is just a bit farther than the halfway to the Gulf of Mexico). There were no suspects at the time of the shooting. Police and city leaders got together and decided that holding a public prayer vigil might encourage witnesses to come forward and - this is as not as far fetched as one might think - might weigh on the conscience of the suspect, causing them to turn themselves in.

One would think that this is just the kind of thing cops and community leaders should do in cities where actual people actually talk to one another. What do we have to lose? If no law enforcement goals are met at least people of good will can come together in fellowship. Nothing else was working to deal with violent crime. What could it hurt?

But, wait!

Let me ask you this. If you showed up to a gathering profusely advertised as a prayer vigil, organized by religious congregations, featuring men and women clerics... Wouldn't you feel even a little silly filing a federal lawsuit alleging that you were shocked...SHOCKED...that among the officiants were police chaplains? That your delicate sensibilities as a humanist were offended by prayers for the injured, and supplications to whomever was responsible to look into their hearts and make amends?

They didn't feel silly, they felt aggrieved. A person like that went for the singular purpose of feigning shock and hurt, so they could allege a violation of the First Amendment to the Constitution, which reads (in pertinent part) "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion..." Aside from a variety of Court decision that place that prohibition on the "Several States" as well, doesn't common sense tell you that someone - it's called Offended Observer standing - who complains because the police and the religious community have gotten together to calm fears and to encourage lawfulness should be told, politely, to get out of the courthouse most riki tik.

I'm calling it the Grady Standard. We'd get a retired jurist, someone who'd been around and seen a thing or two. He or she would read the pleadings of especially iffy lawsuits. If their first utterances upon completion was:

You're shitting me, right?

The case would be dismissed. That's due process enough for something that wastes everyone's time and presents facts that, taken in the best light to the plaintiff, are stupid. No sanctions, no rebuffing. Just "No." Appeals? Sure, fine. Rebuttable presumptions? If we must.

What do people want from the cops? Why would the facts of the Ocala lawsuit, rather than finding a voice in US District Court, not be lauded as an excellent example of members of the community coming together to make their city a better, safer place to live?

Because Tom isn't around to help.