Yesterday, after Senator Warnock’s victory, I was at least able to breathe again. Sadly, that was a real nail biter. But it ended well. So I decided it was time to move on to the Supreme Court. Both of today’s short takes are – not eacttly hopeful. But we need to know about them. If you need some comic relief, you can check out this BuzzFeed article on misconceptions (no pun intended) that men have about women’s anatomy and bodily functions. They reach never-before-published levels of absurdity.
Cartoon
Short Takes –
Mother Jones – Con Law: How a Fake Document Could Help the Supreme Court Diminish Our Democracy
Quote – So this August, historians of the Constitution were alarmed to see Pinckney’s fraud credulously cited in a brief submitted to the Supreme Court in Moore v. Harper, a high-stakes case that will be heard on Wednesday and whose outcome could usher in new state-level voter suppression and gerrymandering schemes. If the decision rests on Pickney’s alleged plan or similar shaky foundations, it may also prove to be the most dramatic example of a troubling new trend at the court: the flaunting [sic] of inconvenient facts and the adoption of alternative ones in their place.
Click through for article. Of course the author means “flouting” – flaunting is something quite different – almost the opposite actually. But that doesn’t change the fact that this is a horrible danger. It is impossible to trust Thmas, Alito, and the MAGA three not to fall for it. I would love to be proved wrong.
Colorado Public Radio News – Supreme Court seems poised to side with Colorado web designer in 303 Creative case
Quote – The case, 303 Creative v. Elenis, pits a Colorado website designer named Lorie Smith against state officials trying to enforce Colorado’s Anti Discrimination Act. Smith wants to start creating custom wedding websites. Specifically, she wants to post a message on her company’s site that she would not create websites for same-sex marriage “or any other marriage that is not between one man and one woman,” according to a brief in the case. But state officials would consider that discriminatory behavior based on the state’s laws, so Smith sued the state.
Click through for details. If I tried to express my deepest opinion on this, I would become incoherent, so I’ll fall back on my favorite bumper sticker: “Jesus called. He wants his church back.”
Food For Thought
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.