SCOTUS Dumps Another Obama Effort

[Rightguide]

No, he didn't have to bake that cake. Two libs joined the decision (7-2)


U.S. Supreme Court backs Christian baker who spurned gay couple
by Reuters
Monday, 4 June 2018 15:33 GMT

http://news.trust.org/item/20180604150452-eu3tg

 

[KeithD]

How again was that an Obama effort? And the decision was made on a technicality that had nothing to do with the central issue, which the SC punted on for now. Try to actually pay attention to reality.

Incidentally, I agreed from the getgo that the baker had a right to decide what his businesses services would be and at the most it should have been made known publicly that he wouldn't provide services to gays, and then others had the right just not to give him business.


Obama, Hillary, Obama, Hillary (don't look at the venial man in the White House) Obama, Hillary, Obama, Hillary.

 

[WoundedKnee]

I hate to say it, but they ruled against the discrimination he was subjected to and not much else.

It is telling that Buzzy and the wise Latina saw nothing wrong with Christian bullying by the State...

 

[Sean]

The SCOTUS didn't dump anything, you knob end.

 

[Rightguide]

How again was that an Obama effort? And the decision was made on a technicality that had nothing to do with the central issue, which the SC punted on for now. Try to actually pay attention to reality.

Incidentally, I agreed from the getgo that the baker had a right to decide what his businesses services would be and at the most it should have been made known publicly that he wouldn't provide services to gays, and then others had the right just not to give him business.


Obama, Hillary, Obama, Hillary (don't look at the venial man in the White House) Obama, Hillary, Obama, Hillary.

The reality is the Colorado Civil Rights Commission violated the Baker's First Amendment rights as did every state court and federal appeals court that ruled against him. That's all that mattered to the Baker. The state cannot force him to bake a cake or involve himself in affairs that violate his religious rights. He won his case. I can tell you this, Obama and the rest of the left is upset.

 

[Rightguide]

The SCOTUS didn't dump anything, you knob end.

They took a dump on the idea the state could make him bake a cake that violated his religious rights. That's all the baker sued to secure, dope.

 

[Sean]

They took a dump on the idea the state could make him bake a cake that violated his religious rights. That's all the baker sued to secure, dope.

You really didn't read the opinion, did you?

 

[WoundedKnee]

It was Colorado... right?

"That's all the baker sued to secure, dope."

He can get it now, I mean, the dope...

 

[bbvi]

How again was that an Obama effort? And the decision was made on a technicality that had nothing to do with the central issue, which the SC punted on for now. Try to actually pay attention to reality.

Incidentally, I agreed from the getgo that the baker had a right to decide what his businesses services would be and at the most it should have been made known publicly that he wouldn't provide services to gays, and then others had the right just not to give him business.


Obama, Hillary, Obama, Hillary (don't look at the venial man in the White House) Obama, Hillary, Obama, Hillary.

Hey NIGGER! The same way the other thread ATTACKED TRUMP for it!

 

[Rightguide]

You really didn't read the opinion, did you?

Actually, I read the entire decision. The operative clause is found on page three, Kennedy:

"Given all these considerations, it is proper to hold that
whatever the outcome of some future controversy involving
facts similar to these, the Commission’s actions here
violated the Free Exercise Clause; and its order must be
set aside."

 

[Rightguide]

Gorsuch concurs:

"Only one way forward now remains. Having failed to
afford Mr. Phillips’s religious objections neutral consideration
and without any compelling reason for its failure, the
Commission must afford him the same result it afforded
the bakers in Mr. Jack’s case. The Court recognizes this
by reversing the judgment below and holding that the
Commission’s order “must be set aside.” Ante, at 18.
Maybe in some future rulemaking or case the Commission
could adopt a new “knowing” standard for all refusals of
service and offer neutral reasons for doing so. But, as the
Court observes, “[h]owever later cases raising these or
similar concerns are resolved in the future, . . . the rulings
of the Commission and of the state court that enforced the
Commission’s order” in this case “must be invalidated.”
Ibid. Mr. Phillips has conclusively proven a First
Amendment violation and, after almost six years facing
unlawful civil charges, he is entitled to judgment."

 

[KeithD]

The reality is the Colorado Civil Rights Commission violated the Baker's First Amendment rights as did every state court and federal appeals court that ruled against him. That's all that mattered to the Baker. The state cannot force him to bake a cake or involve himself in affairs that violate his religious rights. He won his case. I can tell you this, Obama and the rest of the left is upset.

Oh, I get it. You think that Obama is the Colorado Civil Rights Commission. But of course you do.


Obama, Hillary, Obama, Hillary (don't look at the venal man in the White House) Obama, Hillary, Obama, Hillary

 

[KeithD]

Hey NIGGER! The same way the other thread ATTACKED TRUMP for it!

Yep, you don't make a lick of sense, as usual.

 

[Sean]

Actually, I read the entire decision. The operative clause is found on page three, Kennedy:

"Given all these considerations, it is proper to hold that
whatever the outcome of some future controversy involving
facts similar to these, the Commission’s actions here
violated the Free Exercise Clause; and its order must be
set aside."

Jesus Christ, you couldn't have picked any other graf that so completely destroys your contention.

 

[Rightguide]

Oh, I get it. You think that Obama is the Colorado Civil Rights Commission. But of course you do.


Obama, Hillary, Obama, Hillary (don't look at the venal man in the White House) Obama, Hillary, Obama, Hillary

No, I think they gave their efforts a standing ovation and cheered them on. Now, get the real point, the baker won his case, the left messed it's drawers at the news.

 

[Rightguide]

Jesus Christ, you couldn't have picked any other graf that so completely destroys your contention.

Drink another fucking pint and take a friggin' nap.

 

[BotanyBoy]

Jesus Christ, you couldn't have picked any other graf that so completely destroys your contention.

Shit talk complete....now slink off

 

[Oblimo]

The state cannot force him to bake a cake or involve himself in affairs that violate his religious rights. He won his case. I can tell you this, Obama and the rest of the left is upset.

Actually, if you read the opinion, the reason he won has fuck-all to do with his religious rights. There’s long standing case law that you cannot compell commercial artistic expression. That’s the grounds that the majority hung their ruling on, not religious rights.

Edit: the plurality puts more weight on religious rights. But that’s non-binding, although it will be useful ammunition for future cases.

 

[TalkRadio]

In major Supreme Court case, Justice Dept. sides with baker

How again was that an Obama effort? And the decision was made on a technicality that had nothing to do with the central issue, which the SC punted on for now. Try to actually pay attention to reality.

Incidentally, I agreed from the getgo that the baker had a right to decide what his businesses services would be and at the most it should have been made known publicly that he wouldn't provide services to gays, and then others had the right just not to give him business.

Obama, Hillary, Obama, Hillary (don't look at the venial man in the White House) Obama, Hillary, Obama, Hillary.

Oh, I get it. You think that Obama is the Colorado Civil Rights Commission. But of course you do.

Obama, Hillary, Obama, Hillary (don't look at the venal man in the White House) Obama, Hillary, Obama, Hillary

Any article from WaPo (dated 9/7/17) clearly states the cake issue was an "Obama effort."

In a major upcoming Supreme Court case that weighs equal rights with religious liberty, the Trump administration on Thursday sided with a Colorado baker who refused to bake a wedding cake for a same-sex couple.

The DOJ's decision to support Phillips is the latest in a series of steps the Trump administration has taken to rescind Obama administration positions favorable to gay rights and to advance new policies on the issue.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...b822a46da5b_story.html?utm_term=.20e11455f02b

 

[nowisthetime]

Oh look, Wrongguide is making threads again!

And it's about.....











OBAMA!





What surprise? Rightists are predictable!

 

[Taint_mAnn]

How again was that an Obama effort? And the decision was made on a technicality that had nothing to do with the central issue, which the SC punted on for now. Try to actually pay attention to reality.

Incidentally, I agreed from the getgo that the baker had a right to decide what his businesses services would be and at the most it should have been made known publicly that he wouldn't provide services to gays, and then others had the right just not to give him business.


Obama, Hillary, Obama, Hillary (don't look at the venial man in the White House) Obama, Hillary, Obama, Hillary.

Vetteguide is a moron and everything is Obama's fault. His little lap dog queery is the same way. Just scared little white boys.

 

[KeithD]

Any article from WaPo (dated 9/7/17) clearly states the cake issue was an "Obama effort."


https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...b822a46da5b_story.html?utm_term=.20e11455f02b

Obama, Hillary, Obama, Hillary (No, don't look at the venal man in the White House) Obama, Hillary, Obama, Hillary

 

[nowisthetime]

How again was that an Obama effort? And the decision was made on a technicality that had nothing to do with the central issue, which the SC punted on for now. Try to actually pay attention to reality.

Incidentally, I agreed from the getgo that the baker had a right to decide what his businesses services would be and at the most it should have been made known publicly that he wouldn't provide services to gays, and then others had the right just not to give him business.


Obama, Hillary, Obama, Hillary (don't look at the venial man in the White House) Obama, Hillary, Obama, Hillary.

But they wanna get mad when establishments deny their stupid MAGA hat sporting asses. Ultimate hypocrites. Being gay isn't a choice, but being a pork rind eating racist douchebag is a choice.

They are very racist and sexist, notice they mainly trash the black man and the "uppity" woman.

 

[TalkRadio]

Obama, Hillary, Obama, Hillary (No, don't look at the venal man in the White House) Obama, Hillary, Obama, Hillary

I didn't really think, considering your record of posts, that you were able to think above the level of "bus" and "cake."

I'm the new account for sr71plt, which hit the 1,001 story point and the file became too cumbersome to manage, especially in the new system, so I'm transitioning. And I've openly acknowledged this in the board and it's acknowledged on the profiles of both accounts.

So what other alts are you, since you brought it up?

Transitioning? Kinda like....

Obama "evolving" on gay marriage issue
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=BAU8ac4Jkjc

 

[TalkRadio]

Obama, Hillary, Obama, Hillary (No, don't look at the venal man in the White House) Obama, Hillary, Obama, Hillary

I didn't really think, considering your record of posts, that you were able to think above the level of "bus" and "cake."

I'm the new account for sr71plt, which hit the 1,001 story point and the file became too cumbersome to manage, especially in the new system, so I'm transitioning. And I've openly acknowledged this in the board and it's acknowledged on the profiles of both accounts.

So what other alts are you, since you brought it up?

Transitioning? Kinda like...

Forcing Obama's hand on gay marriage
http://forum.literotica.com/showpost.php?p=89220766&postcount=29