The Supreme Court is letting the circuit courts know pretty much where it stands on this one. While they didn't technically overrule the circuit court decisions previously, they effectively did so. The circuit courts in question (4th and 9th) will have to decide whether they want to upload the lower court decision, knowing it would likely be overturned at the USSC... or if they want to figure out something else.
The right thing to do would be to make the correct ruling and follow the lead of the USSC. Something tells me that this will not happen. I figure there has to be something that the circuit courts will try to do, that doesn't just give in, but rather attempts to come up with some ruling that blocks just enough that they may not be overruled.
11 comments:
Winning Bigly.
Come on it was close 7 -2
the last i heard one of the lower courts is going to introduce trump's latest "anti moose-limb" tweets as "evidence."
evidence of what i'm not sure, but one thing is certain - these clowns are not giving up. and challenging a statute whose language could not be more clear. we have a judiciary of the lower courts that has gone completely lawless and is running wild. infected like so many others with stage 4 TDS.
go gatah?
no, go to prison...
http://www.actionnewsjax.com/news/local/corrine-brown-finds-out-whether-she-will-serve-prison-time-/657496007
JACKSONVILLE, Fla. - Former Rep. Corrine Brown had nothing to say to reporters as she left the federal courthouse in Jacksonville on Monday, under a court order to start serving a five-year prison sentence starting in the new year.
#Winning
The liberals avoid this thread, it does not fit. How is it that so many USSC Justices agree with this President?
#losing I have posed this many times....looks like president favors the couple.....good...
her to choose it.
What should have been a special day became memorable for the wrong reasons. Masterpiece Cakeshop refused even to discuss a cake with them because Mr. Mullins and Mr. Craig are a gay couple. The bakery’s owner, Jack Phillips, told them that he would not bake a cake of any kind for their wedding.
The family was shocked. As Ms. Munn said: “We went into that store happy. We left broken.”
What happened that day was humiliating for the family. But it wasn’t complicated. Colorado law provides that retail stores open to the public can’t refuse to serve customers based on factors like race, religion or sexual orientation.
Seeking to upend this rule, whose origins date to 1885, the bakery wants a constitutional right to discriminate, in violation of Colorado’s Anti-Discrimination Act, that is premised on the freedoms of religion and speech.
While the bakery’s legal claims may appear to be novel, its arguments are nothing more than old wine in new bottles. For half a century, businesses have claimed that the First Amendment should excuse them from complying with laws against discrimination, but the Supreme Court has rejected those excuses at every turn.
In the 1960s, Piggie Park, a South Carolina chain of barbecue restaurants, opposed serving black diners in its sandwich shop because the owner believed that racial integration “contravenes the will of God.” The Supreme Court found that Piggie Park violated Title II of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, calling its religious defense frivolous.
In the 1980s, Bob Jones University refused to admit students who engaged in or advocated for interracial dating because of its view that the Bible forbids such relationships. The Supreme Court found that the university’s policy discriminated based on race, notwithstanding the sincerity of its religious beliefs.
As recently as 1984, the law firm King & Spalding argued that it should not have to consider women for
president SB precedent.....auto correct is great....LOL
Hi oPie,
I am sorry your wife died. I will no longer post about her.
KD the despicable again posts his republican IQ!!!!!
FU....got the mud off your swine betrothed yet or do you like eating shit and mud since that is what you farm....LOL
I was warming my home this morning with wood. So nice that my older neighbors have clean dry well seasoned wood in thier homes to do the same.
oPie, grieving a loss of your spouse is a deeply emotional even.
SCOTUS Masterpiece Arguments: Kennedy Blasts Colorado As “Neither Tolerant Nor Respectful”
A quick headline here: Colorado is having difficulties in defending how it applied its public accommodations law to the baker.
Justice Anthony Kennedy told a lawyer for the state that tolerance is essential in a free society, but it’s important for tolerance to work in both directions. “It seems to me the state has been neither tolerant or respectful” of the baker’s views, he said.
Justice Kennedy, a moderate conservative who has written major rulings in favor of gay rights, was widely believed to be the key vote in this case. His skepticism of Colorado’s position is not good news for the state. Other conservatives justices also are asking tough questions of the state.
Justice Kennedy is back, raising deep concerns about comments made by one commissioner on the Colorado Civil Rights Commission who said it was “one of the most despicable pieces of rhetoric” for people to use their religion to hurt others. The justice makes clear he’s troubled by the statement and asks if the state disavows it.
Mr. Yarger said he wouldn’t counsel a client to make a statement like that. Pressed further by Justice Kennedy, he then says, yes, he disavows it.
As one wag on twitter put it: Kennedy will write a flowery and confuse opinion about respecting and tolerating religious belief and then will vote against the baker.
Post a Comment