Connect with us

Breaking – Federal Judge Denies Kim Davis Request: ‘Inconsistent With Basic Principles Of Justice’

Published

on

Kim Davis once again has been rejected by the federal court system, with the judge Wednesday tossing out her motion.

U.S. District Court Judge David Bunning late Wednesday afternoon denied a motion filed by Kim Davis‘ Liberty Counsel attorneys to have his ruling apply only to the couples who sued her. Davis asked the court to not have its decision requiring her to issue marriage licenses to all couples, regardless of gender, not be applied across the board.

In his response, Judge Bunning explained that to deny other couples the same rights as those who filed the lawsuit “would not only create piecemeal litigation, it would be inconsistent with basic principles of justice and fairness,” as Reuters reports.

Bunning also noted that by not specifying that his ruling applies to all couples, he would have “left other eligible couples at the mercy of Davis’ ‘no marriages policy.’”

WATCH: Kim Davis Tells ABC News What Hurts Her The Most Is Being Called ‘A Hypocrite Of A Christian’

In Davis’ motion, filed nearly two weeks ago, her attorneys claimed Bunning’s refusal to rule in her favor has permitted “immediate and irreparable injury to her individual religious liberty and free speech rights.”

Her attorneys also claimed Davis is “facing immediate and substantial harm and consequences for exercising her individual constitutional and statutory rights.”

Judge Bunning today denied those claims, stating her “argument is unpersuasive because Davis has created her own risk of harm by violating a valid order issued by this court.”

UPDATE: Kim Davis Tells Fox News: ‘If I Resign I Lose My Voice’ (Video)

“As for the public interest, the court simply notes that the public has an interest in the enforcement of valid court orders,” Bunning noted.

This is one of a great many rejections Davis has received from every level of the federal court system, from Judge Bunning’s district court, to the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals, to the U.S. Supreme Court.

The ACLU this week requested Judge Bunning to force Davis to use unaltered marriage forms, after one of Davis’ deputy clerks told his court-appointed attorney he was concerned the marriage licenses he is issuing may not be valid because Davis removed her name and the name of the county from them. 

The judge has yet to rule on that motion.

 

This is a breaking news story and has been updated as of 6:24 PM Eastern.

 

EARLIER:

Kim Davis: My Conscience Trumps Others’ Happiness Because ‘I’m Here In Preparation For An Eternity’

Kim Davis’ Attorney Accuses ACLU Of Wanting ‘Her Scalp To Hang On The Wall’

Watch: Kim Davis ‘Sad’ Gays ‘So Unhappy’ That They Don’t Feel ‘Dignified’ Without ‘A Piece Of Paper’ 

 

Image: Screenshot via Courier-Journal 

Continue Reading
Click to comment
 
 

Enjoy this piece?

… then let us make a small request. The New Civil Rights Movement depends on readers like you to meet our ongoing expenses and continue producing quality progressive journalism. Three Silicon Valley giants consume 70 percent of all online advertising dollars, so we need your help to continue doing what we do.

NCRM is independent. You won’t find mainstream media bias here. From unflinching coverage of religious extremism, to spotlighting efforts to roll back our rights, NCRM continues to speak truth to power. America needs independent voices like NCRM to be sure no one is forgotten.

Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Help ensure NCRM remains independent long into the future. Support progressive journalism with a one-time contribution to NCRM, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click here to donate by check.

OUCH

Silenced by Psaki: Reporter Pushing Right Wing Talking Points Can’t Answer Press Secretary’s Basic Questions About Them

Published

on

A reporter was silent after pushing right-wing talking points during the White House’s daily press briefing and being asked to explain her question. The Q&A was so disturbing one well-known political scientist weighed in on social media to declare the White House press corps an “embarrassment.”

“Just a quick question on inflation,” the unnamed reporter began as she asked her question on the administration’s plan to strengthen the social safety net and grow jobs. “Many believe that government spending is a big factor in the current inflation levels. Can you speak to concerns that spending plans that come out of Build Back Better aren’t paid for, and so could mean higher deficits and more inflation in the future.”

Psaki, a little stunned, confirmed she heard correctly: “Aren’t paid for? Build Back Better is paid for.”

The reporter was silent. As time moved on, so did Psaki.

“Entirely,” she added, definitively.

“Okay,” replied the reporter, apparently out of facts and with little understanding of what she was asking. “Can you speak to the concerns that are coming in that it’s not, actually?”

“Who are the concerns from though?” Psaki asked.

Silence again.

“Who’s saying it’s not paid for?” Psaki pressed.

More silence.

“Because there have been a range of economists saying it’s entirely paid for, and that has been a priority for the President. It has also been concluded by a number of Nobel laureates and experts from a range of economic experts on the outside that it will not contribute to inflation. So those are the global experts that we would point to, but there may be others suggesting something else, but I don’t know who those people are,” she said, allowing the reporter to offer a different response, to possibly retain her dignity.

“So if those bills do pass it will not raise taxes?” the reporter asked, which is an entirely different question.

“Well, something being entirely paid for means that part of that is the highest income Americans highest that companies would be asked to pay a little bit more. That has been part of the proposal and part of reforming the tax system to make it more fair,” Psaki explained.

“So they’re also not expected to contribute to future inflation, then?”

“The Build Back Better Bill? Again, it’s fully paid for, we would point to Nobel laureates and a range of global economists who have conveyed that it would not contribute to inflationary pressures.”

Watch:

Continue Reading

RIGHT WING EXTREMISM

Influential Far Right Conservatives Ballistic Over Breyer Retirement: ‘They Must Be Stopped’

Published

on

As soon as the news broke that Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer will retire at the end of the current session, right-wing activists began declaring that Breyer had been “bullied” into stepping down and therefore Republicans must do everything they can to block whomever President Joe Biden nominates to fill that seat.

Carrie Severino of the Judicial Crisis Network and Tom Fitton of Judicial Watch both asserted that Breyer had been forced out of his seat on the court.

Penny Nance of Concerned Women for America declared that Biden must use the vacancy to unify the nation by appointing to the court a “constitutionalist” (which is conservative code for “right-wing ideologue”).

Proclaiming that the Senate is the “our last line of defense against radical leftist SCOTUS justices,” Ohio Republican Senate candidate Josh Mandel used the opportunity to promote his own campaign.

Rep. Lauren Boebert proclaimed that Biden should take a hint from Breyer and “follow him out the door.”

Right-wing activist Brigitte Gabriel openly asserted that it doesn’t even matter whom Biden nominates, “they must be stopped.”

Right-wing commentator Matt Walsh demanded that the position remain vacant until following the midterm elections in November, insisting that “it would be an assault on our democracy” to confirm any nominee before then.

Taking things a step further, radical Arizona state Sen. Wendy Rogers called on the U.S. Senate to “filibuster, stall, delay and hold Biden’s Supreme Court pick until 2024.”

This article was originally published by Right Wing Watch and is republished here by permission.

Continue Reading

RIGHT WING EXTREMISM

Watch: Florida Dems Walk Out After DeSantis’ Surgeon General Refuses to Say if Vaccines Work

Published

on

Democrats on a Florida state Senate committee walked out of the confirmation hearing of Governor Ron DeSantis’ Surgeon General nominee, Dr. Joseph Ladapo, a far right-wing anti-science extremist after he refused to answer if vaccines are safe and effective, and why the Dept. of Health has stopped publicly posting COVID data.

Ladapo, who has been in the position for months, has ties to an infamous conspiracy theorist doctor who talks about alien DNA, demon sperm, and pushes hydroxychloroquine as a COVID cure.

Asked if the COVID vaccines are effective, Ladapo refused to say “yes” or “no.” The Tallahassee Democrat reported Ladapo’s answers were “long-winded, indirect,” and that he “gave murky answers about his criticism of the Biden administration and his ability to work with the federal government, and whether he had a plan for ending the pandemic in Florida.”

“I would say that, that the, the question is a scientific one and it’s one that is answered with data. So, so, the, the question, the question is informed by data on specific outcomes and specific, specific therapies. So that’s a that’s the, that’s the scientific question.”

The Senator, polite but frustrated, pushed back: “Just a yes or no. Do vaccines work? In fighting against COVID-19? Yes or no?”

Related: DeSantis Vows to Fight FDA After COVID Treatment His Top Donor Invested in Is Found to Not Fight Omicron

“Senator,” replied Ladapo, an anti-vaxxer who opposes testing for the deadly coronavirus. “I just, I as a scientist, you know, I I, I am compelled to answer the scientific question, and I’d be happy to answer any specific scientific question that you have related to vaccines and COVID-19.”

So she tried again.

“Scientifically, does the, do the vaccines work against preventing COVID-19? Yes or no?”

“So, yes or no questions are not that easy to find in science,” Ladapo obfuscated. “So, I will I understand I think I have better clarity about your your question at this point. So what I would say is that the most commonly used vaccines in the United States, which would be the the Pfizer product and the product that was was developed by Moderna have been shown to have relatively high effectiveness for the prevention of hospitalization.”

Later, he was asked why the state has stopped publicly releasing COVID data. He again obfuscated.

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2020 AlterNet Media.