let's take a so-called hosanna tabor case.last year the supreme court reinforced a core first amendment principle when it ruled unanimously that churches rather than the government could select their own leaders. churches rather than the government could select their own leaders. every single justice sided with the church's argument in that case -- every single one, it makes sense, freedom of religion is a bedrock foundation of our democracy. i think every member of this body would surely agree that the government doesn't have any business picking a group's religious leaders for them. but professor pillard seemed to have a very different view. prior to the court's unanimous decision, she said the notion that -- quote -- "the constitution requires deference to church decisions about who qualifies as a minister" in the case before the court seemed -- quote -- "like a real stretch." this is the nominee, after the power grab the senate is about to confirm, who says that it's a real stretch that a church would be able to pick its o