and that this broad policy disparages adherence to that faith in the same way that the individual residents of san francisco county felt disparaged when the board of supervisors adopted this resolution saying that the cardinal of that diocese was acting in a terrible and un-american way by refusing to refer adoptees to same-sex couples. so what is the difference? i think we have two key differences, one, that was religious speech, this is not. the basis of religion in an operation does not distinguish on the basis of religion. and that explicitly religious message was directed at the community where the plaintiffs were a member. this operates with aliens abroad, so the way that the plaintiff is trying to get around that, oh, well, it sends a message. it sends a message to all
against those of the islamic faith. that s his argument. and that this broad policy disparages in the same way that the residents of san francisco county felt disparaged when the board of supervisors adopted this resolution saying that the cardinal of that diocese was acting in a terrible and unamerican way by refusing to refer adoptees to same-sex couples. so what s the difference? so i think you have two key differences. one, that was explicitly religious speech. this is not. the order on its face has nothing to do with religion and operation doesn t distinguish on the basis of religion. that explicitly religious message was directed at the community of which plaintiffs were a member. this eo operates with respect to aliens abroad. plaintiffs try to get around that saying it sends a message and it sends a message to all muslims in america.