Posts

Supreme Hypocrisy: The Left’s Intense Attempt to Silence Conservatives Has a New Target

/0 Comments/in , , /by

By Washington Examiner. Nowhere is the Left’s effort to silence conservatives more intense than in its demand that conservative (and therefore constitutionalist) judges recuse themselves from cases that might check America’s cultural revolution.

Justice Amy Coney Barrett faces calls to stay out of a Dec. 5 Supreme Court case in which a Colorado website designer, Lorie Smith, is defending her right to run her business without being forced to make websites for same-sex weddings. She believes marriage is the sacramental union of a man and a woman and argues that she should not be obliged to suggest otherwise.

There are plenty of designers who don’t share Smith’s views who would be delighted to take the business if it were offered to them. No one would be left without a wedding website if activists left Smith in peace. But the point of their hounding her is to make commercial enterprise impossible and life unpleasant for traditional Christians. It is simple religious persecution.

All of us should reject the banning of people from full participation in our society and economy for failing to toe the line of fashionable opinion. If someone’s views are generally regarded as odious, they’ll be shunned. Society will vote with its feet and its pocketbooks. But the Left wields the Colorado Anti-Discrimination Act against Christians as its drafters intended, like medieval European tyrants who marginalized Jews by banning them from owning land. (Read more from “Supreme Hypocrisy: The Left’s Intense Attempt to Silence Conservatives Has a New Target” HERE)

________________________________________________

Supreme Court Justice Amy Coney Barrett Faces Calls to Recuse Herself From LGBTQ Case Over Christian Faith

By Fox News. Supreme Court Associate Justice Amy Coney Barrett is facing calls to recuse herself due to her Christian faith from an upcoming case involving a web designer’s handling of wedding websites for LGBTQ clients.

Former members of People of Praise, a network of lay Christian communities founded in 1971 in South Bend, Indiana, spoke to The Guardian arguing that Barrett should recuse herself from the case of 303 Creative LLC v. Aubrey Elenis. The Supreme Court will begin hearing oral arguments on Dec. 5.

Barrett, a devout Catholic, has not spoken publicly about her affiliation with the secretive faith group People of Praise, which considers her a member. Conservatives argued that Barrett’s faith was wrongfully weaponized during her 2020 confirmation hearings, when the Trump appointee told senators her personal religious beliefs would not interfere with her abilities to be an unbiased judge.

Nevertheless, the justice’s affiliation with the group is being brought up again.

“I don’t believe that someone in her position, who is a member of this group, could put those biases aside, especially in a decision like the one coming up,” Maura Sullivan, a 46-year-old raised in a People of Praise community, told The Guardian. Sullivan, who identified as bisexual, said she came out at 19 and her parents cut her off and prevented her from spending time alone with a younger sister. They have since rekindled their relationship after the parents left the People of Praise community. (Read more from “Supreme Court Justice Amy Coney Barrett Faces Calls to Recuse Herself From LGBTQ Case Over Christian Faith” HERE)

Delete Facebook, Delete Twitter, Follow Restoring Liberty and Joe Miller at gab HERE.

Supreme Court Justice Under Fire for Christian Beliefs on LGBT Case

/0 Comments/in , /by

Justice Amy Coney Barrett was urged to recuse herself from an upcoming Supreme Court case on free speech and LGBT issues by former members of a niche Christian group she is affiliated with, arguing the faith organization has discriminatory policies against same-sex marriage.

Former members of the People of Praise organization recently told the Guardian that the justice’s “lifelong and continued” membership in the Christian group means she cannot rule impartially in the case surrounding a Colorado web designer who says her religious beliefs prevent her from creating custom wedding websites that celebrate same-sex marriages. Despite the request from former People of Praise members who call themselves “survivors” of the organization, legal experts say there’s “no basis” for Barrett to recuse herself.

“I think there is not a strong legal argument for her recusal if the basis for the suggestion is the views of the group that they attribute to her,” Jonathan Entin, a constitutional law professor at Case Western University, told the Washington Examiner.

“Supreme Court justices have views and are connected with a lot of organizations, a lot of groups just in general, and that’s not enough,” Entin said, adding it would be “a different situation if that group were a party to the case.” (Read more from “Supreme Court Justice Under Fire for Christian Beliefs on LGBT Case” HERE)

Delete Facebook, Delete Twitter, Follow Restoring Liberty and Joe Miller at gab HERE.

A Whopping 70% Of FBI’s Abortion-Related Probes Involve Threats to Pro-Life Outfits

/0 Comments/in , /by

. . .Seventy percent of the FBI’s abortion-related cases since the leak of the Supreme Court’s decision in Dobbs v. Jackson involve attacks and threats against pro-life facilities, FBI Director Christopher A. Wray said.

Mr. Wray told the Senate Homeland Security Committee that the FBI has treated violence against pro-life and pro-choice organizations equally while disclosing that anti-abortion groups have been the primary targets of post-Dobbs violence.

“We have quite a number of investigations as we speak into attacks or threats against pregnancy resource centers, faith-based organizations, and other pro-life organizations,” he said, TWT’s Valerie Richardson reported. (Read more from “A Whopping 70% Of FBI’s Abortion-Related Probes Involve Threats to Pro-Life Outfits” HERE)

Photo credit: Flickr

Delete Facebook, Delete Twitter, Follow Restoring Liberty and Joe Miller at gab HERE.

Supreme Court Clears Way for House Dems to Obtain Trump’s Taxes

/0 Comments/in , /by

The Supreme Court paved the way on Tuesday for House Democrats to obtain former President Donald Trump’s taxes, denying a request from Trump’s legal team that he be permitted to withhold them from a congressional committee.

The request was presented to Chief Justice John Roberts and did not contain any dissents. Roberts had earlier this month blocked the Ways and Means Committee from obtaining Trump’s taxes while the Supreme Court considered the request.

“The application for stay of the mandate presented to The Chief Justice and by him referred to the court is denied. The order heretofore entered by The Chief Justice is vacated,” the brief order reads. (Read more from “Supreme Court Clears Way for House Dems to Obtain Trump’s Taxes” HERE)

Delete Facebook, Delete Twitter, Follow Restoring Liberty and Joe Miller at gab HERE.

Supreme Court Rejects Bump Stock Ban Case

/0 Comments/in , /by

On Monday, the United States Supreme Court rejected a challenge to a federal ban on devices known as “bump stocks” that enable semi-automatic weapons to fire like machine guns, according to a report from Reuters.

The Supreme Court justices reportedly declined to review an appeal by a group of firearm dealers and individuals after a lower court rejected their argument that the bump stock ban violated the U.S. Constitution. The ban was first instituted during President Donald Trump’s term (via Reuters):

Trump’s administration moved to reclassify bump stocks as machine guns, which are forbidden under U.S. law, in a rare firearms control measure prompted by a 2017 mass shooting in Las Vegas. The Supreme Court in 2019 declined to block the ban from going into effect. The justices last month rejected appeals by a Utah gun lobbyist and firearms rights groups of lower court rulings upholding the ban as a reasonable interpretation of a federal law prohibiting machine gun possession.

Bump stocks use a gun’s recoil to bump its trigger, enabling a semiautomatic weapon to fire hundreds of rounds per minute to let it shoot like a machine gun. Trump pledged to ban them after a gunman used semiautomatic weapons outfitted with bump stocks in a shooting spree that killed 58 people at a country music festival in Las Vegas.

(Read more from “Supreme Court Rejects Bump Stock Ban Case” HERE)

Delete Facebook, Delete Twitter, Follow Restoring Liberty and Joe Miller at gab HERE.

‘Massive’ Win: PA Supreme Court Rules Undated Mail Ballots Can’t Be Counted

/0 Comments/in , /by

The Pennsylvania Supreme Court on Tuesday sided with an argument made by Republicans in their lawsuit seeking to prevent the counting of improperly completed ballots in next week’s general election, throwing out a lower court’s ruling that would have allowed PA election officials to count absentee and mail-in ballots that were not correctly dated and signed.

PA’s Supreme Court justices vacated the 3rd US Circuit Court of Appeals’ decision that would have allowed the counting of ballots that were not completed as the Keystone State election laws require, and ruled that the “Pennsylvania county boards of elections are hereby ordered to refrain from counting any absentee and mail-in ballots received for the November 8, 2022 general election that are contained in undated or incorrectly dated outer envelopes.”

The PA Supreme Court also in its ruling directed “the Pennsylvania county boards of elections segregate and preserve any ballots contained in undated or incorrectly dated outer envelopes” and noted that the “Court is evenly divided on the issue of whether failing to count such ballots violates 52 U.S.C. §10101(a)(2)(B).”

RNC Chairwoman Ronna McDaniel celebrated the win in Pennsylvania as “massive” for “election integrity.”

(Read more from “‘Massive’ Win: PA Supreme Court Rules Undated Mail Ballots Can’t Be Counted” HERE)

Delete Facebook, Delete Twitter, Follow Restoring Liberty and Joe Miller at gab HERE.

Supreme Court Blocks Congress From Getting Trump’s Tax Returns

/0 Comments/in , /by

The U.S. Supreme Court on Nov. 1 blocked Congress from obtaining former President Donald Trump’s tax returns.

Chief Justice John Roberts, a George W. Bush appointee, stayed an appeals court order that had ruled a congressional panel could gain access to the documents.

Trump filed an emergency application on Monday to the Supreme Court, asking it to halt the order.

Roberts’ stay is temporary, pending further developments in the case.

Rep. Richard Neal (D-Mass.), chairman of the House Committee on Ways and Means, has for years been trying to obtain Trump’s returns, asserting that they are necessary as the panel considers possibly updating how audits of presidents are done. (Read more from “Supreme Court Blocks Congress From Getting Trump’s Tax Returns” HERE)

Photo credit: Gage Skidmore via Flickr

Delete Facebook, Delete Twitter, Follow Restoring Liberty and Joe Miller at gab HERE.

Trump Turns to Supreme Court on Mar-a-Lago Raid

/0 Comments/in , /by

Former President Donald Trump’s lawyers requested the Supreme Court to overturn a lower court’s ruling regarding the Mar-a-Lago raid, saying Tuesday that not allowing the Special Master to review all the seized documents “erodes public confidence in our system of justice.”

On Sept. 21, the 11th Circuit allowed the Department of Justice (DOJ) to keep looking at “classified” documents the FBI seized from Trump’s Florida residence in August, after the DOJ appealed their case.

Judge Aileen Cannon had previously put a pause on the DOJ’s review while a neutral Special Master was being appointed to review all documents, but after the appeals court’s ruling, the third party watchdog can only review materials not bearing classification markings.

The DOJ now has access to roughly 100 documents bearing classification markings, which Trump’s lawyers have claimed were declassified by the former president.

Trump’s request to the Supreme Court was specifically addressed to Justice Clarence Thomas, and asks for the Special Master to have access to the “classified” materials again, claiming that the 11th Circuit “lacked jurisdiction” to stay Cannon’s order. (Read more from “Trump Turns to Supreme Court on Mar-a-Lago Raid” HERE)

Delete Facebook, Delete Twitter, Follow Restoring Liberty and Joe Miller at gab HERE.

Supreme Court Declines to Hear Challenge to Trump-Era Bump Stock Ban

/0 Comments/in , /by

The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday declined to take up a challenge to the Trump-era ban on bump stocks, a gun accessory that allows semi-automatic firearms to shoot more rapidly.

The decision comes after a federal appeals court in August upheld the bump stock ban, which was enacted by the Trump administration in 2018 in response to the 2017 Las Vegas massacre. Then-president Donald Trump vowed to ban bump stocks after it was reported that the gunman used the rifle accessory in his deadly rampage that killed 60 people and injured more than 500 others at a music festival on the Vegas strip.

The Trump administration rule classifies guns equipped with bump stocks as machine guns, which are prohibited by the National Firearms Act and the Gun Control Act. A Utah gun rights advocate and the pro-Second Amendment group Gun Owners of America brought separate challenges to the law, which the Supreme Court declined to hear. The high court did not issue comment on its decision.

Gun Owners of America slammed the court’s decision in a statement.

“This decision sets a horrible and dangerous precedent, one that will allow the ATF to further arbitrarily regulate various firearms. This very same precedent is already being abused by Joe Biden to ban millions of lawfully purchased pistols even without an ACT of Congress!” the group said. (Read more from “Supreme Court Declines to Hear Challenge to Trump-Era Bump Stock Ban” HERE)

Delete Facebook, Delete Twitter, Follow Restoring Liberty and Joe Miller at gab HERE.

Florida Taps Supreme Court to Decide Future of Social Media Regulation

/0 Comments/in , /by

Florida Attorney General Ashley Moody, a Republican, petitioned the Supreme Court on Wednesday to overturn a federal court decision that struck down large portions of the state’s law banning social media companies from de-platforming political candidates.

The petition is in response to a May decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit that held it is unconstitutional for the state to block social media companies from banning politicians, a victory for Big Tech companies that sought to block the law from taking effect.

Moody wrote that the 11th Circuit ruling “strips States of their historic power to protect their citizens’ access to information, implicating questions of nationwide importance,” according to court filings.

The attorney general also mentioned a recent U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit ruling in favor of a similar law in Texas, which blocks companies from removing online posts based on a person’s political disposition.

Because the appeals court decisions conflict, Moody argues the high court should resolve the differences. (Read more from “Florida Taps Supreme Court to Decide Future of Social Media Regulation” HERE)

Photo credit: Flickr

Delete Facebook, Delete Twitter, Follow Restoring Liberty and Joe Miller at gab HERE.