Man named in Supreme Court’s Colorado gay rights ruling says he didn’t request a wedding website

3 years ago by wwaxwork to c/politics

The request in dispute, from a person identified as “Stewart,” wasn’t the basis for the federal lawsuit filed preemptively seven years ago by web designer Lorie Smith, before she started making wed…
Physnrd 37 points 3 years ago path: 0 702280, hotness: undefined, score: 37, children: 1
Mewtwo 7 points 3 years ago

The guy isn't even gay and is married. This shit better get repealed.

path: 0 702280 711495, hotness: undefined, score: 7, children: 0
Saintpaul 22 points 3 years ago path: 0 702266, hotness: undefined, score: 22, children: 0
homebrew_ 16 points 3 years ago

This certainly feels on brand.

path: 0 702732, hotness: undefined, score: 16, children: 0
FunnyUsername 10 points 3 years ago

We really need to get these supreme court stooges out of there yesterday

path: 0 710502, hotness: undefined, score: 10, children: 0
LilDumpy 5 points 3 years ago

The article is paywalled.

path: 0 701088, hotness: undefined, score: 5, children: 0
sadreality 3 points 3 years ago
path: 0 718911, hotness: undefined, score: 3, children: 3
Animoscity 2 points 3 years ago

If you took a second to read any of the articles linked here the person in question didn’t know until a reporter reached out to them this week.

path: 0 718911 719028, hotness: undefined, score: 2, children: 1
sadreality 1 point 3 years ago
path: 0 718911 719028 721520, hotness: undefined, score: 1, children: 0
wwaxwork 1 point 3 years ago

Because no one thought that anyone would actually file a made up case to the Supreme Court..

path: 0 718911 750149, hotness: undefined, score: 1, children: 0
kitonthenet 3 points 3 years ago

huh... just a fully fake case? none of the things that the case is about happened?

path: 0 719039, hotness: undefined, score: 3, children: 1
wwaxwork 1 point 3 years ago

Yep. Not one thing in the filing actually happened. The Supreme court should never have heard the case.

path: 0 719039 750135, hotness: undefined, score: 1, children: 0
lucky0111 2 points 3 years ago

Shoot there’s a paywall what does the article say?

path: 0 701929, hotness: undefined, score: 2, children: 0
Maeve 1 point 3 years ago

I think Lorrie Smith’s (lack of) reputable credibility precludes any thinking person hiring her services.

path: 0 718754, hotness: undefined, score: 1, children: 0
politics
politics

@lemmy.world

login for more options
31388
33987
9405

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles. Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to US politics and contain quality and original content. Social Media adjacent hosts like Substack are allowed, but ONLY if they tie back to a company/subsidiary. No personal or friend group blogs and no self-promotion. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and re-hosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing other users of being bots or paid actors.
  3. No memes, trolling, misinformation, or low-effort posts/comments (including reposts). If you see posts like this that anger you, do not engage. Report, block, and live a happier life than they do. Any slap-fight is subject to comment removals. Fights full of rule violations will result in temporary bans to cool off.
  4. No manipulating votes via bots or alt accounts; this will result in permanent bans. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in an account ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be permanently banned.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules and use critical thinking when reading, posting, and commenting. Users that repeatedly have comments or posts removed, weaponize reports, or violate the code of conduct, will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users. The reason(s) behind moderator action(s) are publicly available through the Modlog.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

• Register To Vote

• Citizenship Resource Center

• Congressional Awards Program

• Federal Government Agencies

• Library of Congress Legislative Resources

• The White House

• U.S. House of Representatives

• U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

• News

• World News

• Business News

• Political Discussion

• Ask Politics

• Military News

• Global Politics

• Moderate Politics

• Progressive Politics

• UK Politics

• Canadian Politics

• Australian Politics

• New Zealand Politics

go to feed...