SCOTUS Shenanigans Watch

:bulb: Sounds like several organizations need an audit! Good thing the IRS will be adding thousands of additional agents (over the next ten years).

13 Likes

Not quite at the “shenanigans” level yet but I fucking hate this headline:

Ah, yes, both sides. On the one side, you might be made to offer the same goods and services you offer to the general public to people you don’t like or don’t think should exist.
On the other side, because of characteristics you have no control over, you might be legally refused goods and services that are offered to everyone else.
:rage:

(Edited to replace the link with the AP version. Thanks, @smulder, for the not-so-subtle but much needed kick.)

20 Likes

But there are so many sides, headline writer.

If you can do this to LGBT people what stops you from doing it to Christians? Methodists, Catholics, Jews, based upon race, based upon ethnicity, etc, etc, etc.

Of course, that’s what they want. So why not just say it?

15 Likes

FWIW the “Voice of America” is explicitly a state propaganda outlet

… dunno if that makes it better or worse

7 Likes

Oh, it was a similar headline on the AP version in the local paper and a bunch of other outlets.
I didn’t even notice which one I pasted, just that it didn’t seem to have a paywall. I think it was AP through and through. :frowning:

8 Likes

ah yes, I keep looking for a raw apnews rss feed but they don’t seem to do that

4 Likes

Gotcha. Fixed the link. My initial search must’ve been faulty. Live and learn.

4 Likes

no i meant for my rss reader

not your problem, no need to do anything

4 Likes
10 Likes

“SCOTUS Arguments in Anti-Gay Marriage Web Designer’s Case Filled with Questions About ‘Hamilton,’ JDate, Black Santa, and Kids in KKK Outfits”

SCOGARBAGE

10 Likes

SCROTUS.

11 Likes

17 Likes

Christ, what an asshole. I’m not even a judge, but I can tell the difference between a chosen characteristic and the others.
One doesn’t choose to be a woman, or Black, or LGBTQ, one chooses to be a NAZI.

23 Likes

But - they’re wise and very serious. /s

12 Likes

Dahlia Lithwick Marc Josef Stern says that the “facts” underlying the case are entirely speculative.

7 Likes

Hmmm, yes. Yes I think they are.

16 Likes
13 Likes

They’ll say that fraud acceptable to them qualifies as free speech.

11 Likes

He really should try both for that opinion to be definitive. As of now, when he’s experienced neither, his opinion is worthless.

11 Likes

I haven’t heard what she said, but I hope so. I hear Roberts was skeptical too.

15 Likes