The Florida Family Association successfully called for companies that advertise during All-American Muslim to withdraw their ads, saying the show is nothing more than “propaganda clearly designed to counter legitimate and present-day concerns about many Muslims who are advancing Islamic fundamentalism and Sharia law.” Though more than 60 companies pulled their ads after FFA supporters sent letters, home improvement chain Lowe’s was the only company to comment publicly on why it did so.

Lowe’s reps have said the company pulled the ads due to “strong political and societal views” from many individuals and groups, but People for the American Way says the decision could have been avoided. “Lowe’s should have ignored the canned emails and gone about its business,” reads the group’s statement. “Instead it caved to a group of fanatics who want to make everyone live in accordance with their narrow and rigid religious beliefs.”

As in similar statements from others objecting to the ad pulls, People for the American Way says Lowe’s is “setting a dangerous precedent by meeting the demands of a fringe group” and should apologize and reinstate the ads in an effort to save face. The group also calls on Americans to “boycott hate” and “take their business elsewhere until Lowe’s rejects extremism.”

In a tweet sent out yesterday, hip-hop and fashion mogul Russell Simmons wrote that he had just purchased the remaining ad spots (which will advertise the Visa Rush card) for next week’s episode of All-American Muslim, adding that Lowe’s should “keep” its money: “Just purchased remaining spots for #allamericanmuslim for next week The show is now sold out! keep your money @Lowes and we will keep ours.”

Simmons also tweeted that he had gathered more than 16,000 signatures for a petition against Lowe’s, and will not stop until the company apologizes and reinstates its ads.

Read the full statement from People for the American Way:

Lowe’s is setting a dangerous precedent by meeting the demands of a fringe group, the Florida Family Association. Let’s be very clear about what happened.

TLC launched a popular reality show called ‘All-American Muslim’ about everyday Americans, who happen to be Muslim, going about their lives. They play sports, they go school, they go to work and pay their taxes. This was too much for the anti-Muslim fear mongers at the Florida Family Association, who were outraged that the show was depicting ‘Muslims as ordinary folks just like you and me.’ An article on the organization’s website suggests that the show instead depict ‘one of its secular, attractive nominal Muslims as he decided to get more serious about his faith, and ended up participating in jihad activity or Islamic supremacist efforts.’

The controversy should have ended there. Lowe’s should have ignored the canned emails and gone about its business. Instead it caved to a group of fanatics who want to make everyone live in accordance with their narrow and rigid religious beliefs.

Lowe’s should not base its advertising decisions on religion or the complaints of groups preaching intolerance. The company claims it is committed to diversity – it’s time to prove it.

There are millions of Americans who happen to be Muslim, and there are tens of millions more who won’t stand for religious bigotry. This holiday season, Americans should boycott hate. Lowe’s has taken the side of the bigots. I’m encouraging our members, and all liberty-loving Americans, to take their business elsewhere until Lowe’s rejects extremism and reinstates its advertising on ‘All-American Muslim.’

As Aaron noted earlier, the Supreme Court this morning decided that the city of New Haven violated the federal civil rights law when it denied white firefighters promotions based in part on their race. That the city was only acting to avoid a lawsuit under the same civil rights law shouldn’t matter, the court ruled in a 5-4 decision.

“Fear of litigation alone cannot justify an employer’s reliance on race to the detriment of individuals who passed the examinations and qualified for promotions,” Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote in the majority opinion, joined by the usual block of conservative justices — Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Samuel Alito, Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas.

Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg dissented, joined by Justices Stephen Breyer, David Souter and John Paul Stevens. Ginsburg wrote that while the white firefighters “understandably attract this court’s sympathy,” they had “no vested right to promotion. Nor have other persons received promotions in preference to them.”

People for the American Way, which supports the Sotomayor nomination, released a statement this morning in anticipation of today’s ruling, saying that the ruling, whatever it would be, “does not reflect upon Sotomayor’s jurisprudence.”

Sotomayor and her panel colleagues were bound by longstanding precedent and federal law. They applied the law without regard to their personal views and unanimously affirmed the district court ruling. To do anything but would have been judicial activism.

The Federalist Society has scheduled a conference call with reporters for later this morning, at which point they’re sure to put their own spin on the decision.

Given how close the ruling was, though, it will be hard to say that Sotomayor’s decision in the lower court was either right or wrong, as a legal matter. In fact, Sotomayor was in the majority of her own court in deciding to affirm the district court’s finding that New Haven did not intentionally discriminate against the white firefighters when it tossed out the results of a promotional exam that had a disparate impact on black and Hispanic applicants. That disparate impact could have been the basis for a lawsuit against the city. Whether race was also a factor, in addition to avoiding a lawsuit, is an issue that was never directly addressed or briefed in the lower court, which, as I’ve explained before, is one reason that the full Second Circuit voted against re-hearing the case.

Whether the Supreme Court majority today made new law by deciding the way it did will be the subject of contention for weeks to come.

As I reported earlier, she had some vehement Republican critics. Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) made a point of noting, in announcing her confirmation, that every solicitor general who’s served since 1985 endorsed her nomination.

“The confirmation of Elena Kagan to be the nation’s advocate before the Supreme Court is an historic step for women,” said Kathryn Kolbert, president of People for the American Way, in a statement released this evening. “Just over a century ago, women weren’t allowed to practice law or vote—today’s vote is a sign of how far we’ve come.  She will be a passionate and articulate advocate for our laws and Constitution.”