From Kelly v. Trump, decided Monday by Patricia W. Griffin, Master in Chancery, Delaware Court of Chancery:
Kelly’s main theory of her case is that Trump creates the illusion of being a devout Christian, while engaging in acts that Kelly contends are against the main tenets of Christianity. She claims that his actions substantially burden and injure her “free exercise of religion” causing her “eternal harm” and “chilling [her] free exercise of religion by [his] increased threat of government sponsored religious persecution and, or the actual government sponsored persecution for [her] attempts to freely exercise [her] religion.”
Kelly alleges that, through Trump’s deception, he is misleading people, deceiving them to sin, and dooming them to hell. The primary harm Kelly claims is that, because Trump is leading people to hell, Kelly will not be able to love them for eternity. She also alleges that she is persecuted, and her religious belief chilled, because of Trump’s support for one religious belief, and suppression of others, which substantially burdens her freedom to exercise her faith.
Three guesses about how the court resolves the case ….
Note also this:
Her claim that she will suffer eternal harm by her inability to have relationships with people if Trump’s actions cause people (including acquaintances/friends she mentions in her complaint) to go to hell is not a sufficiently concrete injury. It is impossible for this Court to determine what happens to people after they die and under what circumstances a person goes to hell. That determination is appropriately left to a higher power.