Detailed text transcripts for TV channel - CNN - 20170207:23:44:00
>> well, your honor, we think we prevail under either test but we think this case is closer to larson because in larson, what you had was a facially neutral law. it didn't not mention religious domination by name but it did focus on religious groups and the result of it was to distinguish between them in a way that favored some and not others. and that's exactly what we have here. we have an order that on its face doesn't mention any denomination, but that is -- we have alleged and there's strong evidence already to support is intended to favor some religious groups over others and that is -- ...
Source: news source