Quo Vadis GOP?

[Josquius]

]

1. I assume cheerleaders are not considered "sexually oriented" performances in which someone is nude or appeals to the "prurient interest in sex"?

img]

2. Since GOP is so obsessed with protecting children "who cannot make decisions on their own" from being exposed to sexually suggestive performances (and generally being sexualized), I assume child beauty pageants will be in their sights soon?

https://www.universalroyalty.com/beauty-pageant-photos.html

Is your daughter the most beautiful child in Texas? Prove it!
We host the nation's best baby pageants, beauty pageants, little miss beauty contests for babies, children, teens, adults, boys and girls of all ages.

[ge/129322269.png[/img]

Surely you're not implying republicans are dishonest hypocrites

[DGuller]

Marjorie Taylor Greene calls Lauren Boebert 'a little b----' on the House floor

In across the ocean Russian assets are fighting each other today.

[viper37]

Marjorie Taylor Greene calls Lauren Boebert 'a little b----' on the House floor

In across the ocean Russian assets are fighting each other today.

[viper37]

 

[Valmy]

First they came for the Radical left gays but I did not speak up as I was not radical left.

But granted these days they act like the wanting things like public schools is radically leftist so who knows? Maybe they were coming for you all along.

[Zoupa]

[Barrister]

https://www.politico.com/minutes/congress/07-6-2023/mtg-freedom-caucus-ouster/

Marjorie Taylor Greene reportedly ejected from the House Freedom Caucus.

There's no exactly sure why.  One the one hand it might be for calling fellow member Lauren Boebert a "little bitch" on the House floor.  But it might also be because MTG supports current GOP House Speaker Mike McCarthy, and she actually *gasp* voted in favour of the debt deal that prevented the USA from defaulting on its debt.

[viper37]

[crazy canuck]

 

I wonder what kind he drinks

[Richard Hakluyt]

Thanks for posting that Viper, I'm starting Saturday morning off in a very genial mood now 

[Admiral Yi]

 

[Eddie Teach]

https://www.politico.com/minutes/congress/07-6-2023/mtg-freedom-caucus-ouster/

Marjorie Taylor Greene reportedly ejected from the House Freedom Caucus.

There's no exactly sure why.  One the one hand it might be for calling fellow member Lauren Boebert a "little bitch" on the House floor.  But it might also be because MTG supports current GOP House Speaker Mike McCarthy, and she actually *gasp* voted in favour of the debt deal that prevented the USA from defaulting on its debt.

I thought it was Kevin.

[Hamilcar]

Mmm yes please hand me one of those delicious meat based beers. Yum.

[Duque de Bragança]

I wonder what kind he drinks

Old-school Guinness I guess. 

I think they removed the need for fish some years ago, however.

[grumbler]

An interesting detail has come to my attention: the respondent in the recent Creative LLC v. Elenis decision by the USSC allowing for discrimination against protected minorities does not exist.  And the court knew that before they issued their ruling.  The case was fabricated to get the issue on front of the Supreme Court, probably knowing (as, indeed, it turned out to be the case) that no lower court would rule in its favor.

It is also noteworthy that the majority opinion argued that enforcing Colorado's anti-discrimination laws would result in things like "the government" forcing "an unwilling Muslim movie director to make a film with a Zionist message." Film making is not a public accommodation.

The fact that the case was entirely fabricated seems not to have bothered any court in the chain.  It seems to me that the courts should have rejected the case as without merit unless the plaintiff chose to sue that true respondent, the state of Colorado.  Can any of the law talkers here explain why all three levels of the federal courts chose to accept the case knowing that it was founded on a lie?  And why did not any of the federal courts force the plaintiff to first sue through the state courts?

I am concerned that these sorts of tailored cases, designed to allow the Supreme Court's conservative majority to impose its will, even in the absence of an actual legal harm, will proliferate.