News, articles, reports and editorials from independent media* around the world.
Rules:
*Independent Media is free from government and outside corporate interests. Everything has a bias so use your best judgment.
*Current depends on the subject, its relevance today, and whether new, publicly available information has been released since the article has been published. When in doubt please put the publication date in a tag [like this.]
Moderation will be lax as long as posts fit the spirit of this community.
For a less serious random news feed, check out: https://sh.itjust.works/c/wildfeed
This isn't necessarily a rebuke of her position on gay marriage...only that they are letting the settlement decision against her, stand. She did violate their rights according to the law, so she must pay the damages.
.. for now. It probably just wasn't the 'right' case to let them weasel their way around to doing it.
Told ya they'd drop it with no comment. It's a weak case to begin with and not one they want to set precedent upon.
It was weak, but the fact it gained so much support is troubling. There are well funded interest groups who look for worthy contenders to puppet against the supreme court for these kinds of challenges.
Her lawyers are part of it: https://lc.org/