Skip to content
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(The New York Times)   USSC Justice Elena Kagan to Rowan County Clerk: "Did I stutter?"   (nytimes.com) divider line
    More: Obvious  
•       •       •

20504 clicks; posted to Politics » on 31 Aug 2015 at 11:22 PM (3 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



464 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2015-08-31 10:52:31 PM  
Great headline!
 
2015-08-31 11:25:16 PM  
Tomorrow, she'll deny another marriage license. They'll file suit. She'll be held in contempt. Then she'll get her Kickstarter campaign up and running before settling into her new role as a Fox News contributor.
 
2015-08-31 11:25:29 PM  
It wasn't just Kagan. It was the full Court:

bitlogic.comView Full Size
 
2015-08-31 11:27:07 PM  
Grabs popcorn.
 
2015-08-31 11:28:11 PM  

Stile4aly: Tomorrow, she'll deny another marriage license. They'll file suit. She'll be held in contempt. Then she'll get her Kickstarter campaign up and running before settling into her new role as a Fox News contributor.


We went over this in the last thread: no media outlet is going to be putting that woman's face on television on a regular basis. At best she'll get a job in right-wing radio.
 
2015-08-31 11:28:13 PM  
I'm going to go out on a limb and say the reaction was "Not this shiat again!"
 
2015-08-31 11:28:58 PM  
When it comes to institutionalized bigotry, gay is the new black.
 
2015-08-31 11:29:07 PM  
Honestly, I think the SCOTUS is just done dealing with this issue. Nothing anyone can bring to the court is going to make any difference now, since every possible argument has been shut down.

And I don't think the courts of appeals are so inclined to waste their time on it anymore either.
 
2015-08-31 11:29:17 PM  
OK, so what are the odds for the various outcomes?
- She will fold and start issuing licenses to gay couples
- She will stand by her convictions and get fired, only to be set for life with book deals and tours
- She will stand by her convictions and get fined, only to become an instant millionaire by some idiotic crowdsourcing campaign.
- She will stand by her convictions and get imprisonment, setting up the martyr complex and she'll become the head of a new church cult.
- She will stand by her convictions and suddenly get raptured, proving most of us wrong as to God's true intentions.
- She will be confronted by a gay couple wishing to get a marriage license and, when not hearing any voices of guidance from above, she'll recreate the famous Scanners scene.
 
2015-08-31 11:29:51 PM  
She ugly.
 
2015-08-31 11:29:59 PM  
Jail her ass for contempt.
 
2015-08-31 11:30:30 PM  

vygramul: It wasn't just Kagan. It was the full Court:

[www.bitlogic.com image 687x401]


From what I've read, not necessarily the full court.  at least 3 of them had to sign off on it.  She might still have two supporters. :P
 
2015-08-31 11:30:40 PM  

Stile4aly: Tomorrow, she'll deny another marriage license. They'll file suit. She'll be held in contempt. Then she'll get her Kickstarter campaign up and running before settling into her new role as a Fox News contributor.


GoFundMe and Kick starter will take down any fundraisers for people doing illegal things or attempting to defend themselves in court. I think a fundraiser in support of someone openly defying a court order qualifies as immediate banhammer.
 
2015-08-31 11:31:01 PM  
i1072.photobucket.comView Full Size
 
2015-08-31 11:32:20 PM  

Farkin_Crazy: Honestly, I think the SCOTUS is just done dealing with this issue. Nothing anyone can bring to the court is going to make any difference now, since every possible argument has been shut down.

And I don't think the courts of appeals are so inclined to waste their time on it anymore either.


Even though the initial decision wasn't unanimous, all justices can agree that if you ignore a Supreme Court edict that your case doesn't get any sympathy.
 
2015-08-31 11:32:26 PM  

kb7rky: Jail her ass for contempt.


I hope she is principled enough for that. Send her away.
 
2015-08-31 11:32:41 PM  
Tomorrow should be interesting.

When she refuses to do her job and she will, the judge needs to make an example of her. Jail and $1,000 per day until she does her job or resigns.
 
2015-08-31 11:32:46 PM  
Can we move on now?
 
2015-08-31 11:32:56 PM  
i.imgur.comView Full Size
 
2015-08-31 11:33:09 PM  

LeoffDaGrate: OK, so what are the odds for the various outcomes?
- She will fold and start issuing licenses to gay couples
- She will stand by her convictions and get fired, only to be set for life with book deals and tours
- She will stand by her convictions and get fined, only to become an instant millionaire by some idiotic crowdsourcing campaign.
- She will stand by her convictions and get imprisonment, setting up the martyr complex and she'll become the head of a new church cult.
- She will stand by her convictions and suddenly get raptured, proving most of us wrong as to God's true intentions.
- She will be confronted by a gay couple wishing to get a marriage license and, when not hearing any voices of guidance from above, she'll recreate the famous Scanners scene.


She strikes me as too stupid and ugly to make a run at books/radio/tv.  She won't have any career as a scam artist like that.
 
2015-08-31 11:33:47 PM  

LeoffDaGrate: vygramul: It wasn't just Kagan. It was the full Court:

[www.bitlogic.com image 687x401]

From what I've read, not necessarily the full court.  at least 3 of them had to sign off on it.  She might still have two supporters. :P


Yes, but that also means that even the trio of Alito/Thomas/Scalia didn't agree to hear her appeal. She has  at most two supporters.
 
2015-08-31 11:33:58 PM  

LeoffDaGrate: vygramul: It wasn't just Kagan. It was the full Court:

[www.bitlogic.com image 687x401]

From what I've read, not necessarily the full court.  at least 3 of them had to sign off on it.  She might still have two supporters. :P


But the supporters (assuming there are any) are now muted. Her case will never see the inside of the court.

Done. Finished. Over.
 
2015-08-31 11:34:25 PM  

Summoner101: Farkin_Crazy: Honestly, I think the SCOTUS is just done dealing with this issue. Nothing anyone can bring to the court is going to make any difference now, since every possible argument has been shut down.

And I don't think the courts of appeals are so inclined to waste their time on it anymore either.

Even though the initial decision wasn't unanimous, all justices can agree that if you ignore a Supreme Court edict that your case doesn't get any sympathy.


I'll take that bet.
 
2015-08-31 11:35:07 PM  
Her lawyer might claim conflict of interest based on Kagan's comfortable-looking shoes and prowess for softball.
 
2015-08-31 11:35:09 PM  
move her over to a job at the same pay

until she retires her ass


that way no lawsuit or bullshiat
 
2015-08-31 11:35:59 PM  

BalugaJoe: She ugly.


The ugliness comes from inside. It shines through.
 
2015-08-31 11:36:13 PM  

LeoffDaGrate: OK, so what are the odds for the various outcomes?
- She will fold and start issuing licenses to gay couples
- She will stand by her convictions and get fired, only to be set for life with book deals and tours
- She will stand by her convictions and get fined, only to become an instant millionaire by some idiotic crowdsourcing campaign.
- She will stand by her convictions and get imprisonment, setting up the martyr complex and she'll become the head of a new church cult.
- She will stand by her convictions and suddenly get raptured, proving most of us wrong as to God's true intentions.
- She will be confronted by a gay couple wishing to get a marriage license and, when not hearing any voices of guidance from above, she'll recreate the famous Scanners scene.


- Folding: Not going to happen. She's too invested in this crap.

- Fired: Can't happen. She's an elected official. (Impeachment won't happen either.)

- Fined and made millionaire: None of the crowd sourcing fundraisers will let a campaign stand to benefit someone defying a court order.

- Imprisonment: The most likely outcome. And then she'll have multiple appearances on Fox News under the banner of "War on Religion!"

- Rapture: *laughs like a hyena*

- Scanners scene: pleaseohpleaseohplease
 
2015-08-31 11:36:24 PM  
FTA:
"Ms. Davis should not have to choose between her sincerely held religious beliefs and her livelihood, her lawyers said"

Wait...people are having their faith tested now?
 
2015-08-31 11:36:28 PM  
That women, Kim Davis, looks stupid mean and bitter.
 
2015-08-31 11:37:09 PM  

Farkin_Crazy: Honestly, I think the SCOTUS is just done dealing with this issue. Nothing anyone can bring to the court is going to make any difference now, since every possible argument has been shut down.

And I don't think the courts of appeals are so inclined to waste their time on it anymore either.


The thing is, they'll still have to waste time on it until the bigots either die off or get with the program. Hell, we're still dealing with blatant attempts to ban abortion 43 years after Roe v. Wade.
 
2015-08-31 11:37:43 PM  

Farkin_Crazy: Honestly, I think the SCOTUS is just done dealing with this issue. Nothing anyone can bring to the court is going to make any difference now, since every possible argument has been shut down.

And I don't think the courts of appeals are so inclined to waste their time on it anymore either.


Unless they manage to replace one of the justices in the majority with a conservative...
 
2015-08-31 11:38:10 PM  

LeoffDaGrate: - She will stand by her convictions and get fired, only to be set for life with book deals and tours
- She will stand by her convictions and get fined, only to become an instant millionaire by some idiotic crowdsourcing campaign.
- She will stand by her convictions and get imprisonment, setting up the martyr complex and she'll become the head of a new church cult.


I think you're underestimating the personal charisma needed for any of those endeavors to be successful.

As an uninteresting middle-aged bureaucrat, Davis makes a perfectly good pawn for other demagogues to use, but it's unlikely she has the talent to exploit herself.
 
2015-08-31 11:38:15 PM  
This searing act of validation would forever echo in her conscience

Is this a court of law or an emo poetry reading?
 
2015-08-31 11:38:20 PM  

davynelson: move her over to a job at the same pay

until she retires her ass


that way no lawsuit or bullshiat


She's an elected official. Either she gets impeached (not going to happen) or she quits. Otherwise, she's there til the end of her term.
 
2015-08-31 11:38:35 PM  

davynelson: move her over to a job at the same pay

until she retires her ass

that way no lawsuit or bullshiat


Screw that, throw her in jail for contempt until she agrees to do her job or resigns. And if she wants to file lawsuit, good: it doesn't get much more frivolous than filing a suit  after you've already been told 'no' by the Supreme Court, which means she'd be paying both sides costs for her little suit. Heck, if she gets a GoFundMe to pay her legal costs and the state goes balls to the walls billing, they could actually make a profit from all those donations and buy some new school supplies or something.
 
2015-08-31 11:38:46 PM  
"The Human Rights Campaign praised the Supreme Court's decision. "Ms. Davis has the fundamental right to believe what she likes," said JoDee Winterhof, the group's senior vice president for policy and political affairs. "But as a public servant, she does not have the right to pick and choose which laws she will follow or which services she will provide."

Exactly! It is 2015 and adult human beings, adult human beings who apparently graduated from some sort of law school, still need this idea explained to them, aggressively, through the court system? It is a long, rugged road ahead.
 
2015-08-31 11:38:47 PM  
The Human Rights Campaign praised the Supreme Court's decision. "Ms. Davis has the fundamental right to believe what she likes," said JoDee Winterhof, the group's senior vice president for policy and political affairs. "But as a public servant, she does not have the right to pick and choose which laws she will follow or which services she will provide."

It's not even really about that. She's asking for the right to use her governmental authority to force OTHERS to follow her religious beliefs. It's not that she's even picking or choosing which laws she'll follow... She's deciding for other people whether they're allowed to live their own lives according to their own beliefs, in a legal manner. It has fark-all to do with her beliefs, aside from them being used as a flimsy rationale to fark with people she doesn't respect.

No one is inviting her to be the third partner in their gay marriage, or forcing her to be have any sort of homosexual behavior. Wake me up when someone does, because then she'll be right to say it has anything at all to actually do with her religious beliefs. Until then she should STFU, GBTW, and remember that in a free country other people get to be free too. Leave them the fark alone.
 
2015-08-31 11:39:10 PM  
Long term, seems the clerk has two options: concede defeat or quit.  If religious principle is *really* that important, quitting is the only real choice.  ..or so it seems.
 
2015-08-31 11:39:24 PM  

Theaetetus: LeoffDaGrate: vygramul: It wasn't just Kagan. It was the full Court:

[www.bitlogic.com image 687x401]

From what I've read, not necessarily the full court.  at least 3 of them had to sign off on it.  She might still have two supporters. :P

Yes, but that also means that even the trio of Alito/Thomas/Scalia didn't agree to hear her appeal. She has  at most two supporters.


Wait, why is 3 the magic number? Not a snark, but why 3?

Wouldn't it take 5 (a majority) to hear it?

4 at a minimum, in case a justice were to recuse themself?
 
2015-08-31 11:39:41 PM  
So will her officer closed tomorrow for more "computer repairs" or whatever that was supposed to be the other day?
 
2015-08-31 11:40:06 PM  
USSC?

I though the preferred acronym was SCOTUS.
 
2015-08-31 11:40:10 PM  

Resident Muslim: FTA:
"Ms. Davis should not have to choose between her sincerely held religious beliefs and her livelihood, her lawyers said"

Wait...people are having their faith tested now?


Off-topic: This is what irks the crap out of me about anyone in an elected office. It is NOT a job, it is a public service. It is neither a career nor a livelihood
 
2015-08-31 11:41:31 PM  
Did she take an inaugural oath to God to uphold the laws and the Constitution?

That means she lied to God.

She's screwed either way.

HELL FIRE FOR YOU, BIATCH!
 
2015-08-31 11:42:40 PM  
2.bp.blogspot.comView Full Size
 
2015-08-31 11:42:41 PM  

Summoner101: Even though the initial decision wasn't unanimous, all justices can agree that if you ignore a Supreme Court edict that your case doesn't get any sympathy.


epmgaa.media.lionheartdms.comView Full Size
 
2015-08-31 11:43:15 PM  

maram500: Resident Muslim: FTA:
"Ms. Davis should not have to choose between her sincerely held religious beliefs and her livelihood, her lawyers said"

Wait...people are having their faith tested now?

Off-topic: This is what irks the crap out of me about anyone in an elected office. It is NOT a job, it is a public service. It is neither a career nor a livelihood


False dichotomy. It is both. The idea that an elected position can't be a career is demonstrably ridiculous. We even have the term career politician. Add to that salaries that regularly meet or exceed living wage, the regular abandonment of other livelihoods during the occupation of such positions, etc. your claim just doesn't hold up. There's no rational or factual basis, at least in the USA (and frankly most nations) for claiming that an elected position can't be a career. Hell, the very notion of "judge" absolutely ruins that argument.
 
2015-08-31 11:43:42 PM  

Farkin_Crazy: But the supporters (assuming there are any) are now muted.


Mooted.

Even though Thomas rarely speaks in court.
 
2015-08-31 11:44:57 PM  

Farkin_Crazy: Theaetetus: LeoffDaGrate: vygramul: It wasn't just Kagan. It was the full Court:

[www.bitlogic.com image 687x401]

From what I've read, not necessarily the full court.  at least 3 of them had to sign off on it.  She might still have two supporters. :P

Yes, but that also means that even the trio of Alito/Thomas/Scalia didn't agree to hear her appeal. She has  at most two supporters.

Wait, why is 3 the magic number? Not a snark, but why 3?

Wouldn't it take 5 (a majority) to hear it?

4 at a minimum, in case a justice were to recuse themself?


As a filter to get rid of frivolous appeals (like this one), but while still retaining the illusion of lack of bias and prejudice. If it took a majority to hear a case, then the outcome would be forgone - 5 justices already voted to hear an appeal to reverse whatever lower court decision the appeal is from, so you've already got a 5-4 majority at a minimum. Same thing if it took 4 justices - you know you've got at least 4 votes, so it's explicitly saying that the appeal is up to one swing judge.
Three justices is a nice low level filter where frivolous suits get kicked out, but even if three justices agree to hear the case, they could still lose 6-3. As a result, reversals are not constant, and we can pretend that the justices are waiting to make a decision until they've at least read the briefs.

/we know they're not, though
 
2015-08-31 11:45:23 PM  

haolegirl: So will her officer closed tomorrow for more "computer repairs" or whatever that was supposed to be the other day?


If so she better be able to prove it to the judge's satisfaction. Somehow I doubt he's very sympathetic about now. Lying to a judge will get you jail time.
 
2015-08-31 11:45:37 PM  

maram500: Off-topic: This is what irks the crap out of me about anyone in an elected office. It is NOT a job, it is a public service.


If it's paid, it's both.

\some aren't
 
Displayed 50 of 464 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking





On Twitter




In Other Media
Top Commented
Javascript is required to view headlines in widget.
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report