I guess Kagan got her message through for once:
The Supreme Court on Thursday night stopped the execution of a Texas inmate because the state refused his request to have a Buddhist spiritual adviser with him in the death chamber.
The court’s decision contrasted with its actions last month, when it allowed the execution of a Muslim prisoner in Alabama who was denied his request to have an imam with him at the time of his death.
The court’s conservatives were criticized by liberals and religious conservatives for that decision. They said that the request came too late.
Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh, writing only for himself, said Texas’s policy was discriminatory.
“The relevant Texas policy allows a Christian or Muslim inmate to have a state-employed Christian or Muslim religious adviser present either in the execution room or in the adjacent viewing room,” Kavanaugh wrote. “But inmates of other religious denominations — for example, Buddhist inmates such as Murphy — who want their religious adviser to be present can have the religious adviser present only in the viewing room and not in the execution room itself for their executions.
“In my view, the Constitution prohibits such denominational discrimination.”
That is the same argument Justice Elena Kagan made last month when she and the court’s liberals objected to the execution of Alabama inmate Domineque Ray.
Say this for flip-flopping, it’s better than adhering to terrible principles.